Hewitt v. State

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtMABRY, J.
Citation43 Fla. 194,30 So. 795
Decision Date09 April 1901
PartiesHEWITT et al. v. STATE.

30 So. 795

43 Fla. 194

HEWITT et al.
v.
STATE.

Florida Supreme Court

April 9, 1901


Error to circuit court, Duval county; Rhydon M. Call, Judge.

Dick Hewitt and others were convicted of murder, and bring error. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

1. By the common law an accused had the right to be tried in the county in which the offense was alleged to have been committed, where the witnesses were supposed to be accessible, and where he might have the benefit of a good character, if he had established one there; but, if an impartial trial could not be had in such county, it was the practice to change the venue to some other county, where such trial could be obtained. The right of trial in the county where the offense is alleged to have been committed, when an impartial jury can there be had, is secured to the accused by section 11, Declaration of Rights (constitution of 1885); but it is not the design of this provision to force a trial in a county where an impartial jury cannot be obtained, as to do so would defeat the greater and more important right of a speedy trial by an impartial jury.

2. The statutes in force in this state in reference to change of venue in criminal cases without the consent of the accused (sections 2928, 2929, Rev. St., and chapter 4394, Laws 1895) authorize the court to direct a change of venue when an impartial jury cannot be secured in the county where the offense is alleged to have been committed, and, limiting their meaning to authorize the change without the consent of the accused when it is impossible to secure an impartial jury in the county where the offense was committed, they are constitutional.

3. An accused may, under statutes in this state, be convicted as an accessory before the fact to murder in the second degree.

COUNSEL [43 Fla. 195] Wills & Long, D. M. Gornto, and John E. Hartridge, for plaintiffs in error.

William B. Lamar, Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

MABRY, J.

In October, 1898, plaintiffs in error Dick Hewitt and Lum Hewitt were indicted in Bradford county for the murder of J. T. Johnson, and plaintiff in error Moss Hewitt and one Minnie Hewitt were jointly indicted with them as accessories before the fact of said murder. Upon a trial of the case in Bradford county, in January, 1899, the jury acquitted Minnie Hewitt, and disagreed as to the other defendants. The case came on for trial at another term of court in Bradford county, held in October, 1899, and after the exhaustion of two special venires, one for 100 jurors and the other for 25, and the issuance of another for 30 jurors, the court [43 Fla. 196] made the following order, viz.: 'Came again the defendants, each in his own proper person and attended by his counsel; whereupon, it appearing to the court that a qualified jury cannot be obtained in this county to try said case, now, therefore, it is considered that said case be, and the same is hereby, transferred, and the venue changed to the circuit court of Duval county for trial.' The order further provided for the transmission of the necessary papers to Duval county. It appears from a transcript of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 practice notes
  • State Ex Rel. Cosner v. See, No. 9910.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • March 4, 1947
    ...Commonwealth v. Reilly, 324 Pa. 558, 188 A. 574; State v. Brown, 103 Vt. 312, 154 A. 579, 76 A.L.R. 1029;[42 S.E.2d 37] Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795; State v. Miles, 43 Idaho 46, 248 P. 442; State v. Cutshall, 110 N.C. 538, 15 S.E. 261, 16 L.R.A. 130; People v. Peterson, 93 Mich......
  • State Ex Rel. Oscar Cosner v. See, No. 9910
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • March 4, 1947
    ...St. Rep. 662, 3 Ann. Cas. 191; Commonwealth v. Reilly, 324 Pa. 558, 188 A. 574; State v. Brown, 103 Vt. 312, 154 A. 579; Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795; State v. Miles, 43 Idaho 46, 248 P. 442; State v. Cutshall, 110 N. C. 538, 15 S. E. 261, 16 L. R. A. 130; People v. Peterson, 93......
  • Sailor v. State, No. 98-1476.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • April 23, 1999
    ...any Florida court approved a change of venue not explicitly requested or affirmatively agreed to by the defendant. See Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795 (1901). The defendants in Hewitt did not object to a change of venue at the time the court ordered the change. The only issue on ap......
  • Haddock v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • December 19, 1939
    ...accused has the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury in the county where the crime was committed. See Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795; O'Berry v. State, 47 Fla. 75, 36 So. 440. It is shown by the transcript that 116 jurors were summoned for jury duty and fifty of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
24 cases
  • State Ex Rel. Cosner v. See, No. 9910.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • March 4, 1947
    ...Commonwealth v. Reilly, 324 Pa. 558, 188 A. 574; State v. Brown, 103 Vt. 312, 154 A. 579, 76 A.L.R. 1029;[42 S.E.2d 37] Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795; State v. Miles, 43 Idaho 46, 248 P. 442; State v. Cutshall, 110 N.C. 538, 15 S.E. 261, 16 L.R.A. 130; People v. Peterson, 93 Mich......
  • State Ex Rel. Oscar Cosner v. See, No. 9910
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • March 4, 1947
    ...St. Rep. 662, 3 Ann. Cas. 191; Commonwealth v. Reilly, 324 Pa. 558, 188 A. 574; State v. Brown, 103 Vt. 312, 154 A. 579; Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795; State v. Miles, 43 Idaho 46, 248 P. 442; State v. Cutshall, 110 N. C. 538, 15 S. E. 261, 16 L. R. A. 130; People v. Peterson, 93......
  • Sailor v. State, No. 98-1476.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • April 23, 1999
    ...any Florida court approved a change of venue not explicitly requested or affirmatively agreed to by the defendant. See Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795 (1901). The defendants in Hewitt did not object to a change of venue at the time the court ordered the change. The only issue on ap......
  • Haddock v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • December 19, 1939
    ...accused has the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury in the county where the crime was committed. See Hewitt v. State, 43 Fla. 194, 30 So. 795; O'Berry v. State, 47 Fla. 75, 36 So. 440. It is shown by the transcript that 116 jurors were summoned for jury duty and fifty of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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