Jackson v. State
| Decision Date | 12 December 1922 |
| Citation | 94 So. 505,84 Fla. 646 |
| Parties | JACKSON v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Highlands County; George W. Whitehurst Judge.
John Jackson was convicted of an offense against nature, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
Offense denounced as abominable and detestable crime against nature not merely common-law crime, but includes other acts of bestiality. The offense denounced by section 5424, Revised General Statutes 1920, and making punishable the abominable and detestable crime against nature either with mankind or with beasts, is not merely the common-law crime against nature, but includes other acts of bestiality.
Bills of exception must be made up and signed during trial term in absence of special order extending time. Except upon special order allowing further time, bills of exceptions must be made up and signed during the term of court at which the trial was had.
Judge not authorized to further extend time for prosecuting bill of exceptions in vacation. Where the presiding judge has, during the term, under rule 97, Rules of Circuit Courts in Law Actions, granted further time for presentation of the bill of exceptions, he is not authorized in vacation to make another order further extending the time.
Bill of exceptions presented after expiration of extended time not considered as part of record, although contained in transcript. Where a bill of exceptions is presented to the trial court after the expiration of the further time allowed for its presentation under rule 97, Rules of Circuit Courts in Law Actions, it cannot be considered as a part of the record, although copied into the transcript of the record filed in the appellate court.
L. Grady Burton, of Wauchula, for plaintiff in error.
Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., and J. B. Gaines, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
By indictment of a grand jury of Highlands county plaintiff in error was charged with the 'abominable and detestable crime against nature,' the offense denounced by section 5424, Revised General Statutes 1920. He was tried upon this indictment and found guilty a charged. To review the judgment imposing sentence writ of error was taken from this court.
Two assignments of error are presented. The first presents the question of the propriety of the order overruling a demurrer to the indictment. The demurrer was properly overruled upon authority of Ephriam v. State, 82 Fla. 93, 89 So 344. In the opinion the court said:
The holding that the acts alleged in the indictment in that case constituted the offense is decisive of this question.
The second assignment challenges the ruling denying the motion for a new trial. The point argued upon this assignment is the alleged insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. The verdict was returned on February 8, 1922, and sentence was imposed on the following day. The paper copied into the transcript of the record, purporting to be a bill of exceptions, recites that the defendant, at the same term of the court, submitted his motion for a new trial; that this motion was overruled and denied on June 10, 1922, and 60 days allowed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wright v. State, s. 69-644
...as by those set forth in the statute, or by a combination of the two. Ephraim v. State, 1921, 82 Fla. 93, 89 So. 344; Jackson v. State, 1922, 84 Fla. 646, 94 So. 505; Lason v. State, 1943, 152 Fla. 440, 12 So.2d 305; Delaney v. State, Fla.1966, 190 So.2d 578; Swain v. State, Fla.App.1965, 1......
-
Reed v. State
... ... and cannot be considered by the appellate court. 2 R. C. L ... 144; Bush v. State, 21 Fla. 569; Washington v ... State, 48 Fla. 62, 37 So. 573; Bardwell v ... State, 49 Fla. 1, 38 So. 511; Carter v ... Stockton, 60 Fla. 33, 53 So. 450; Jackson v ... State, 84 Fla. 646, 94 So. 505; Granquist v ... State, 86 Fla. 32, 97 So. 205; Lanier v ... Shayne, 85 Fla. 212, 95 So. 617; Preston v ... State, 86 Fla. 476, 98 So. 358 ... In the ... absence of some reasonable showing why the bill of exceptions ... was not ... ...
-
Franklin v. State
...appeal dismissed 387 U.S. 426, 87 S.Ct. 1710, 18 L.Ed.2d 866 (1967); Ephraim v. State, 82 Fla. 93, 89 So. 344 (1921); Jackson v. State, 84 Fla. 646, 94 So.2d 505 (1922); English v. State, 122 Fla. 77, 164 So. 848 (1935); Lason v. State, 152 Fla. 440, 12 So.2d 305 (1943); Fine v. State, 153 ......
-
Delaney v. State, 34541
...answered this very question contrary to appellant's contention. Ephraim et al. v. State, 1921, 82 Fla. 93, 89 So. 344; Jackson v. State, 1922, 84 Fla. 646, 94 So. 505; English v. State, 1935, 122 Fla. 77, 164 So. 848; Lason v. State, 1943, 152 Fla. 440, 12 So.2d 305; Fine v. State, 1943, 15......