Ex Parte Bush
| Decision Date | 05 July 1904 |
| Citation | 48 Fla. 69,37 So. 177 |
| Parties | Ex parte BUSH. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Columbia County; Bascom H. Palmer, Judge.
Application by Sam Bush for writ of habeas corpus. From an order denying the writ, petitioner brings error. Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
1. The title to chapter 4395, p. 159, Acts 1895, which reads, as shown from the enrolled bill in the office of the Secretary of State, 'An act to amend sections 2440 and 2441 of the Revised Statutes of the State of Florida, definding and punishing grand and petit larceny,' is sufficiently broad to embrace the subject of grand larceny, and therefore the act is not violative of section 16 of article 3 of the Constitution of 1885.
COUNSEL A. J. Henry, for plaintiff in error.
W. H Ellis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
On the 2d day of May, 1904, Sam Bush filed in the circuit court for Columbia county his petition for a writ of habeas corpus alleging therein that at the fall term, 1902, of the circuit court for said county, he was indicted for breaking and entering a dwelling house with intent to commit a felony, said felony being charged in the indictment to consist of the larceny of property of less value than $100 that at the spring term, 1903, of said court, he was convicted as charged in the indictment, sentenced to imprisonment for two years in the state prison, and was held by the sheriff of said county to be conveyed to said prison to serve out said sentence, which said detention in custody by said sheriff was without lawful authority. Upon this petition the court granted the writ.
The sheriff made return that he held the petitioner by virtue of a mandate from the Supreme Court of Florida, a copy of which was attached thereto.
We deem it unnecessary to set forth the proceedings in detail, but suffice it to say that, after considering the petition and return and the evidence adduced, the court denied the motion of petitioner for his discharge, and remanded him to the custody of the sheriff. From this judgment the petitioner seeks relief here by writ of error.
The indictment alleges that the value of the property which defendant intended to steal was $51.45, and the verdict found the defendant guilty as charged.
Three errors are assigned, all of which embrace the proposition that the indictment upon which petitioner was tried in the circuit court did not charge him with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Allen
... ... [83 ... Fla. 223] As to the sufficiency of titles to acts amending ... sections of general revisions of statutes, see Ex parte Bush, ... 48 Fla. 69, 37 So. 177; Strobhar v. State, 55 Fla ... 167, 47 So. 4; State ex rel. Turner v. Hocker, 36 ... Fla. 358, 18 So. 767; ... ...
-
Pensacola Elec. Co. v. Soderlind
... ... therein, the courts will generally ignore such questions and ... dispose of the case on other grounds. Ex Parte ... Bailey, 39 Fla. 734, 23 So. 552 ... A ... motion to require the plaintiff to elect between the counts ... of the declaration on ... the printed volume, would govern, had the action been brought ... while such act was in force, unmodified or unrepealed. Ex ... parte Sam Bush, 48 Fla. 69, 37 So. 177, and Strobhar v ... State, 55 Fla. 167, 47 So. 4. But such was not the case ... Section 1 of [60 Fla. 173] chapter 5372 ... ...
-
Strobhar v. State
... ... the subject of grand larceny. In reference to the same ... contention this court, in Ex parte Bush, 48 Fla. 69, 37 So ... 177, said: 'It becomes unnecessary for us to determine ... whether or not the title of said act, as printed in chapter ... ...
-
Investment Co. v. Trueman
...in the office of the Secretary of State, and not as it appears in the printed and published volume, must govern. Exparte parte Sam Bush, 48 Fla. 69, 37 So. 177, and Strobhar State, 55 Fla. 167, 47 So. 4. Section 1969, which we have copied above, expressly authorizes either party to an actio......