Chambers v. State
| Citation | 113 Fla. 786,152 So. 437 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
| Decision Date | 22 January 1934 |
| Parties | CHAMBERS et al. v. STATE. |
Petition by Isiah (Izell) Chambers, Jack Williamson, Charlie Davis and Walter Woodward (Woodard) for leave to apply to the circuit court of Broward county for a writ of error coram nobis after a judgment thereof, adjudging petitioners guilty of first degree murder and sentencing them to death, was affirmed by the Supreme Court (151 So. 499).
Leave granted.
COUNSEL S. D. McGill and Robert Crawford, both of Jacksonville, for petitioners.
Cary D Landis, Atty. Gen., and Louis F. Maire, of Fort Lauderdale for the State.
After a judgment of the circuit court in and for Broward county adjudging each of the several petitioners to be guilty of murder in the first degree and sentencing them each to death by electrocution, as is required under the laws of this state, had been entered and writ of error had been taken to such judgment and it had been affirmed by this court, the petitioners now come with a petition for leave to apply to the circuit court in and for Broward county for a writ of error coram nobis.
The record shows that one of the petitioners, Chambers, pleaded not guilty, was tried and convicted, while the other three petitioners pleaded guilty, and thereupon the court heard evidence upon which to determine the degree of their guilt and, after hearing such evidence and considering such pleas, adjudged them each to be guilty of murder in the first degree.
The petition for leave to file writ of error coram nobis presents allegations which, if true, would constitute ground for issuing the writ. It is not the province of this court to determine whether or not such allegations are true. The determination of such question may be had in the circuit court under issues duly made for that purpose.
The petition then sets forth that the facts which constitute the basis of the petition were unknown to the petitioners, or to their attorneys who represented them at the trial, or to the court at the time of the trials, verdicts, sentences, and judgments. These allegations are shown upon the face of the petition to be false, because certainly the petitioners knew on the date of the trial about all things which they alleged happened to them prior to the date of the trial.
It is alleged in the petition that the attorneys appointed by the court to represent the petitioners at the trial, and who did appear as counsel of record for the petitioners at the trial, made no preparation of the case, made no inquiries, and asked no question of the petitioners in regard to certain confessions upon which the state relied for convictions; that the attorneys made no argument at the trial, or at any other time, filed no motion for new trial, and that the petitioners were without knowledge that the said attorneys represented them in their interests until on or about the day sentence of death was passed upon them; that they are uneducated, and that they knew nothing about court matters and are wholly ignorant of court procedure and had no knowledge of their rights or how to protect their interests.
It is alleged
The entire transcript of the records of the trials is made a part of the petition. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioners were severely beaten, cursed, and otherwise mistreated b a number of white men in an effort to coerce the petitioners to confess the commission of the homicide with which they were charged, and that this treatment resulted in the confessions without which conviction could not have been had.
It is further alleged in the petition:
'Your petitioners further represent that on the morning immediately before they were carried by the Sheriff of Broward County, Florida, from the County Jail to the Circuit Court to plead to the indictment found against them, the Sheriff again warned them of the confessions they had theretofore made during the night of May 20, 1933, and the morning of May 21, 1933, and they were told by him to stick to them, he (the Sheriff) at the same time dangling a large bunch of keys in front of petitioners' eyes, stating to them that unless they did stick, said keys would be turned over to a crowd that night that would be on the outside waiting and your petitioners would be taken by it and lynched. And your p...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hysler v. State of Florida
......Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 56 S.Ct. 461, 80 L.Ed. 682; Chambers v. Florida, 309 U.S. 227, 60 S.Ct. 472, 84 L.Ed. 716; Lisenba v. California, 314 U.S. 219, 62 S.Ct. 280, 86 L.Ed. —-. In this collateral attack upon the judgment of conviction, the petitioner bases his claim on the recantation of one of the witnesses against him. He cannot, of course, contend ......
-
Mann v. Richardson
...... . . Page 761 . I . The three respondents now before us are Dash, Richardson, and Williams. We first state the essential facts involved as to each. . Dash: In February 1959, respondent Dash was charged with first-degree robbery which, ...126 (1956), nor the situation where the circumstances that coerced the confession have abiding impact and also taint the plea. Cf. Chambers v. Florida, 309 U.S. 227, 60 S.Ct. 472, 84 L.Ed. 716 (1940). It is not disputed that in such cases a guilty plea is properly open to challenge. 12 ......
-
Hendricks v. State
...State, 91 Fla. 396, 107 So. 535; Washington v. State, 92 Fla. 740, 110 So. 259; Lake v. State, 101 Fla. 646, 135 So. 123; Chambers v. State, 113 Fla. 786, 152 So. 437; House v. State, 130 Fla. 400, 177 So. 705; Johnson v. State, 144 Fla. 87, 197 So. 721; Horne v. Bushell, 2 Strange 950, 93 ......
-
Dantzic v. State
...Further investigation of the Chambers case discloses: Prior to the cited decision, the Supreme Court of Florida in Chambers v. State, 113 Fla. 786, 152 So. 437 (1934), had granted the petitioner's application for leave to file a petition for writ of error Coram nobis in the Circuit Court of......