Barton v. State, G-59

Decision Date29 June 1965
Docket NumberNo. G-59,G-59
Citation176 So.2d 597
PartiesWilliam Eugene BARTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

William Eugene Barton, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and John S. Burton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

WIGGINTON, Acting Chief Judge.

This appeal is from a final order rendered by the trial court on July 30, 1964, denying appellant's motion filed pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentence then being served by appellant under a final judgment rendered by the Court of Record of Escambia County on May 29, 1964. The notice of appeal in this case was not filed by appellant in the Court of Record of Escambia County until October 15, 1964, more than seventy-six days after rendition of the order appealed.

Criminal Procedure Rule 1 was adopted by the Supreme Court of Florida effective on April 1, 1963. In one of the first decisions construing this rule the Supreme Court said that appeals from orders entered in proceedings brought under Criminal Procedure Rule 1 shall be taken to the appropriate District Court of Appeal, and that appeal time shall be that governing criminal appeals. 1 This decision fixed the appeal time for filing a notice of appeal in Criminal Procedure Rule 1 proceedings at ninety days from the rendition of the order or judgment appealed.

As the decisional law of this state construing Criminal Procedure Rule 1 developed, and the true nature and purpose of this proceeding became clear, the principle of law emerged that although this type proceeding constituted a collateral attack on a judgment rendered in a criminal case, such proceedings are nevertheless civil in nature and, therefore, must be litigated in accordance with rules governing civil procedure, both trial and appellate. 2

In State v. Weeks 3 it was held that proceedings under Criminal Procedure Rule 1 provide a remedy co-equal with, but actually more expeditious than, post-conviction habeas corpus. At the time the decision was rendered in the Weeks case, it was generally understood by the bench and bar of Florida that because of certain previous decisions rendered by the Supreme Court of Florida, the time for taking an appeal from a final order or judgment entered in a post-conviction habeas corpus proceeding was ninety days as provided by the statute relating to appeals in criminal cases. Only recently, however, the Supreme Court has come to appreciate the error of its prior judgment on this point, and in the case of Crownover v. Shannon 4 has receded from and overruled its previous decisions holding that the appeal time from a final judgment in post-conviction habeas corpus is ninety days. 5 In Crownover the Supreme Court has now taken the unequivocal position that proceedings for post-conviction habeas corpus are collateral attacks of a civil...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Whitney v. State, 65-401
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 8, 1966
    ...Proceedings under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1 have been held to be civil. See: State v. Weeks, Fla.1964, 166 So.2d 892; Barton v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So.2d 597. Principles of res adjudicata applicable to civil matters would prevent the same issues being raised in a subsequent proceed......
  • Cash v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 13, 1968
    ...We find no error and affirm. This procedure partakes of a civil remedy. State v. Weeks, Fla. 1964, 166 So.2d 892; Barton v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So.2d 597; Whitney v. State, Fla.App.1966, 184 So.2d 207; Bryant v. State, Fla.App.1967, 204 So.2d 9. It is incumbent upon the appellant to ma......
  • Bryant v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 14, 1967
    ...201 So.2d 85. Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1 proceedings partake of a civil nature. See: State v. Weeks, supra; Barton v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So.2d 597; Whitney v. State, Fla.App.1966, 184 So.2d 207. Even though a court reporter is not present, there are methods of establishing what evi......
  • Rolon v. State, 36393
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • July 26, 1967
    ...same as that allowed in civil cases, i.e., 60 days. Reasoning from the above cases, the First District Court of Appeal held in Barton v. State, 176 So.2d 597 (DCA 1, Fla.App.1965), that the appeal time in Rule I cases should be 60 days. This decision was given prospective application only, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT