Coe-mortimer Co. v. State
Decision Date | 13 May 1921 |
Citation | 88 So. 475,81 Fla. 701 |
Parties | COE-MORTIMER CO. v. STATE. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Original proceedings in certiorari by the Coe-Mortimer Company, a corporation, to review a conviction of the corporation for a statutory offense, rendered by the county court and affirmed by the circuit court.
Conviction quashed.
Syllabus by the Court
Certiorari is not a writ of right. A writ of certiorari is not a writ of right.
When affirmance below will be quashed on certiorari stated. If upon an inspection of the transcript of the record sent up under a writ of certiorari issued by this court it appears that the county court was without jurisdiction of the subjectmatter or of the defendant, or that the charge as made constitutes no offense under the law, either because of the invalidity of the statute or because of the absence of essential allegations, or that the judgment or other proceeding of record had on the charge is not in accordance with the essential requirements of the law, the judgment of affirmance by the circuit court will be quashed; otherwise the writ of certiorari will be quashed.
Statutory offense must clearly appear by information or necessary inference. In a penal proceeding the offense made punishable by the statute must clearly appear by the allegations of the information or by necessary inference from express allegations.
Misrepresentations on tag on commercial fertilizer a statutory offense. The misrepresentation, made an offense by section 3726, Gen. St 1906 (section 5711, Rev. Gen. St. 1920), is that which is made in connection with a sale of the commercial fertilizers referred to in the statute, which misrepresentation appears on the 'label or tag' that is required to be attached to the package containing the commercial fertilizer that is sold.
When relief by certiorari appropriate stated. Where an information in a criminal prosecution does not contain essential allegations to state the offense, and the defect is fatal, it cannot be cured by evidence; and relief by certiorari may be appropriate, in the absence of appellate procedure, where the penalty is a fine against a corporation; the writ of habeas corpus not being available as in case of illegal deprivation of personal liberty.
Landis, Fish & Hull and Fred R. Wilson, all of De Land, for petitioner.
Van C Swearingen, Atty. Gen., and D. Stuart Gillis and J. B. Gaines, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
A writ of certiorari was issued by this court for the purpose of determining on a certified transcript of the record whether the essential requirements of the law were duly observed in the affirmance by the circuit court of a judgment of the county court of St. Lucie county, convicting the corporation of a statutory offense and imposing a fine as punishment.
A writ of certiorari is not a writ of right. Holmberg v. Toomer, 78 Fla. 116, 82 So. 620; Harrison v. Frink, 75 Fla. 22, 77 So. 663; Benton v. State, 74 Fla. 30, 76 So. 341; Ragland v. State, 55 Fla. 157, 46 So. 724; Edgerton v. Mayor, etc., of Green Cove Springs, 18 Fla. 528.
In this case the court exercised its discretion, and issued a writ of certiorari upon the showing made in the application for the writ.
If upon an inspection of the transcript of the record it appears that the trial court was without jurisdiction of the subject-matter or of the defendant, or that the charge as made constitutes no offense under the law, either because of the invalidity of the statute or because of the absence of essential allegations, or that the judgment or other proceeding of record had on the charge is not in accordance with the essential requirements of the law, the judgment of affirmance will be quashed; otherwise the writ of certiorari will be quashed. First Nat. Bank of Gainesville v. Gibbs, 78 Fla. 118, 82 So. 618; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Wright & Co., 79 Fla. 600, 84 So. 604; Balbontin v. State, 68 Fla. 84, 66 So. 421; Malone v. City of Quincy, 66 Fla. 52, 62 So. 922; State v. Live Oak, P. & G. R. Co., 70 Fla. 564, 70 So. 550; Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. Ray, 52 Fla. 634, 42 So. 714; Jacksonville, T. & K. Ry. C. v. Boy, 34 Fla. 389, 16 So. 290; Mernaugh v. City of Orlando, 41 Fla. 433, 27 So. 34; Basnet v. City of Jacksonville, 18 Fla. 523.
The statutes provide that:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gibbs v. Mayo
...it is not necessarily to be inferred that the fertilizers were in fact sold to the consignee.' (Emphasis supplied.) Coe-Mortimer Co. v. State, 81 Fla. 701, 88 So, 475, 476. Nor does proof of breaking and entering a gin house sustain a charge of breaking and entering a storehouse. Givens v. ......
-
Lorenzo v. Murphy
... ... The demurrer above ... referred to came on to be heard before the County Court and ... the said Judge proceeded to state that in view of the ... allegation that these parties had not complied with the ... Fictitious Name Statute, Section 865.09, that he would ... Bank v. Gibbs, 78 Fla. 118, ... 82 So. 618; Western Union Tel. Co. v. O. H. Wright & Co., ... 79 Fla. 600, 84 So. 604; Coe-Mortimer Co. v. State, ... 81 Fla. 701, 88 So. 475. And that: ... '* * * A ... careful reading of the review of the English authorities made ... by ... ...
-
Dresner v. City of Tallahassee
...was also formerly the rule if the conviction in the lower trial court was the product of an unconstitutional statute. Coe-Mortimer Co. v. State, 81 Fla. 701, 88 So. 475; Porter v. State, 91 Fla. 667, 108 So. 814. Similarly it has been held that the imposition of a penalty for activities not......
-
Dowling v. State
... ... inferior court has exceeded its jurisdiction, or has not ... proceeded according to the essential requirements of the law, ... in cases where no direct appellate proceedings are provided ... In the ... case of Coe-Mortimer Co. v. State, 81 Fla. 701, 88 ... So. 475, the court held that if upon an inspection of the ... record sent up under a writ of certiorari it appears that the ... trial court had no jurisdiction of the subject-matter or of ... the defendant, 'or that the charge as made constitutes no ... ...