Davis v. State

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtWEST, J.
Citation80 So. 65,76 Fla. 459
PartiesDAVIS v. STATE.
Decision Date15 November 1918

80 So. 65

76 Fla. 459

DAVIS
v.
STATE.

Florida Supreme Court

November 15, 1918


Error to Circuit Court, Taylor County; M. F. Horne, Judge.

John C. Davis was convicted of bigamy, and he brings error. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Under the first clause of section 3526, General Statutes of 1906, prescribing a penalty against one who, having a former husband or wife living, marries another person in this state, the second marriage constitutes the gist of the offense and must be laid in the indictment with particulars of time and place; but the first marriage, being matter of inducement, may be averred without particulars of time and place.

In a prosecution under the first clause of section 3526, General Statutes of 1906, an indictment which fails to allege the maiden name of the first spouse of the defendant, but which does allege her name to be Mrs. (giving the name of the defendant), as Mrs. John C. Davis in this case, is not thereby rendered fatally defective and amenable to a motion to quash on that ground.

Under the provisions of section 1518, General Statutes of 1906, a duly authenticated copy of a record of a court of another state with the seal of the court annexed, of an application for marriage license, a certificate that such license was issued, and the return of the minister who united the parties in marriage pursuant thereto, which form a part of the records of such court, is admissible in evidence in the courts of this state.

COUNSEL [76 Fla. 460] Chas. P. Diamond, of Perry, for plaintiff in error.

Van C. Swearingen, Atty. Gen., and Worth W. Trammell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

WEST, J.

Plaintiff in error was indicted in the circuit court of Taylor county, upon a charge of bigamy. The indictment, omitting formal parts, is as follows:

'The grand jurors of the state of Florida, duly chosen impaneled and sworn diligently to inquire and true presentment make in and for the body of the county of Taylor upon their oath present that John C. Davis late of said county, on the 16th day of May, A. D. 1916, in the county and state aforesaid did unlawfully marry and have for his wife one Beulah Chancey. He the said [76 Fla. 461] John C. Davis did then and there have a former wife living to wit, Mrs. John C. Davis.'

Upon trial of the case on the charge made in the indictment, a verdict finding him guilty as charged was rendered, whereupon he was sentenced by the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • Flynn v. State Tax Comm'n, No. 3925.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • January 6, 1934
    ...decisions of the Supreme Court and of this court.” See, also, comment on this case in Republic Iron & Steel Co. v. State, 204 Ala. 469, 80 So. 65 and Foster & Creighton Co. v. Graham, 154 Tenn. 412, 285 S. W. 570, 47 A. L. R. 971. In Thompson v. McLeod the majority seem to have thou......
1 cases
  • Flynn v. State Tax Comm'n, No. 3925.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • January 6, 1934
    ...decisions of the Supreme Court and of this court.” See, also, comment on this case in Republic Iron & Steel Co. v. State, 204 Ala. 469, 80 So. 65 and Foster & Creighton Co. v. Graham, 154 Tenn. 412, 285 S. W. 570, 47 A. L. R. 971. In Thompson v. McLeod the majority seem to have thou......

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