Dadswell v. State, 6221.
Decision Date | 11 May 1966 |
Docket Number | No. 6221.,6221. |
Citation | 186 So.2d 274 |
Parties | Honorable Jack E. DADSWELL, Justice of the Peace, District 1, Pinellas County, Florida, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida ex rel. Hyman Phillips, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Page S. Jackson, County Atty., and Daniel N. Martin, Asst. County Atty., Clearwater, for appellant.
Lawrence E. Lyman, St. Petersburg, for appellee.
This appeal is taken from a writ of prohibition issued by the Circuit Court for Pinellas County, Florida, against appellant.
Appellant, a justice of the peace of Pinellas County, tried defendant Phillips for the crime of petit larceny, a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months or by a fine not exceeding $300.00. At the conclusion of the trial, Phillips questioned appellant's power to try the case and demanded the case be transferred to the Civil and Criminal Court of Record for Pinellas County. Appellant refused to transfer the cause, found Phillips guilty and ordered presentence investigation. Phillips then filed a petition for writ of prohibition which was issued after a hearing thereon. Appellant was prohibited from proceeding further in the cause except as a committing magistrate on the ground that the criminal jurisdiction of the justice of the peace courts in Pinellas County was limited to misdemeanors punishable by imprisonment not exceeding three months or by a fine not exceeding $100.00. This appeal followed.
The question to be answered here is what provision of § 37.01, Fla.Stats., F.S.A., applies to the justice of the peace courts of Pinellas County. Section 37.01 provides in pertinent part:
Until 1951, Pinellas County had a county court and the justice of the peace courts tried misdemeanors pursuant to § 37.01(3), Fla.Stats., F.S.A. Then the legislature, by special act, abolished the county court and created a civil and criminal court of record in the county. That act, Ch. 27258, Laws of Fla., 1951, provides:
Apparently the justice of the peace courts continued to try criminal cases pursuant to § 37.01(3), Fla.Stats., F.S.A., until 1959 when the attorney general of Florida advised the justices of the peace through a letter that he felt their jurisdiction was controlled by the provisions of § 37.01(2), Fla.Stats., F.S.A.
At the conclusion of the hearing on the writ of prohibition, the trial court found that the civil and criminal court of record created by Chapter 27258 was not equivalent to the constitutional "criminal court of record" referred to in § 37.01(2). This finding has not...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bernhardt v. State
...99 Fla. 782, 128 So. 258 (1930). It has also been said that 'practice' is the method of conducting litigation. Dadswell v. State ex rel. Phillips, 186 So.2d 274 (Fla.App.2d 1966). 'The entire area of substance and procedure may be described as a 'twilight zone' and a statute or rule will be......
-
Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure., In re
...99 Fla. 782, 128 So. 258 (1930). It has also been said that "practice" is the method of conducting litigation. Dadswell v. State ex rel. Phillips, 186 So.2d 274 (Fla.App.2d 1966). The entire area of substance and procedure may be described as a "twilight zone" and a statute or rule will be ......
-
Wohl v. Harry Rich Corp., 79-2084
...v. Federal Realty Corporation, 104 Fla. 93, 139 So. 209 (1932); Vassar v. State, 139 Fla. 213, 190 So. 434 (1939); Dadswell v. State, 186 So.2d 274 (Fla.2d DCA 1966); Joe Hatton, Inc. v. Conner, 247 So.2d 782 (Fla.4th DCA 1971); CIC Leasing Corp. v. Dade Linen and Furniture Co., 279 So.2d 7......