Jones v. State
Decision Date | 22 January 1938 |
Citation | 178 So. 404,130 Fla. 645 |
Parties | JONES v. STATE. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Michael C. Jones was convicted of armed robbery, the conviction was affirmed, and he files an application for leave to file a petition for a writ of error coram nobis.
Petition denied.
COUNSELMichael C. Jones, in pro.per.
It having been made to appear by sworn petition of Michael C Jones for a writ of error coram nobis that he was convicted of the crime of armed robbery in the criminal court of record of Hillsborough county and sentenced to the state prison of Florida for the term of his natural life; that on writ of error to the judgment of conviction the same was affirmed by this court and reported in 122 Fla. 307, 165 So. 33.The basis of the petition is the alleged perjured testimony of William B. Poling given at the trial of the petitioner coupled with 'duress, coercion, intimidation and threats' by the prosecuting officer to induce the witness Poling to testify falsely against petitioner.The affidavit of the witness is attached to the petition.An affidavit of Annie Louis Burrows was filed in support of the petition.It is further alleged that material facts were in existence which were not adjudicated by the trial court.
In the case of Lamb v. State,91 Fla. 396, text page 405 107 So. 535, 538, this court said: 'The remedy cannot be invoked on the ground that an important witness testified falsely about a material issue in the case; nor can newly discovered evidence, going to the merits of the issue tried, be used as a basis for the writ.'SeeWashington v. State,95 Fla. 289, 116 So. 470;Reed v. State,94 Fla. 32, 113 So. 630;Skipper v. State, Fla.,173 So. 692.
The petition fails to show sufficient facts authorizing the order sought.
The petition is denied.
I think the petition and accompanying affidavits might make out a good prima facie showing for leave to apply to trial court for writ of error coram nobis under the principles laid down by this court in Skipper v. Schumacher,124 Fla 384, 169 So. 58, 64, and in Mooney v. Holohan,294 U.S. 103, 55 S.Ct. 340, 79 L.Ed. 791, 98 A.L.R. 406, if it were not for the fact that there was other evidence in the case sufficient to have supported the judgment of conviction,...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Ward v. Stanley
...was too limited to predicate an intelligent judgment. About all that was proven was that Stanley had been seriously hurt and had lost more than a year's work. For these reasons, we think the judgment should be reversed and a new trial awarded, unless the defendant in error will consent to a further remittitur of $2,000 and let the judgment stand at $2,500. It is so ordered. WHITFIELD, BUFORD, and CHAPMAN, JJ., concur. [
130 Fla. 645] BROWN, J., concurs in the conclusion. ELLIS, J.,... -
Jones v. Mayo
...L. Ed. 1002. After exhausting all remedies for a reversal of his conviction petitioner filed in the Supreme Court of Florida an application for leave to file a petition for writ of error coram nobis, which was denied in
Jones v. State, 130 Fla. 645, 178 So. 404. Thereafter petitioner filed in the Circuit Court of Union County, Florida his petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking his release, which was denied by the Judge of that court and on appeal the judgment was affirmed... -
Jones v. Mayo
...basis for a petition for writ of error coram nobis filed in the Supreme Court of Florida in 1937 and in that case the court held the ground insufficient to warrant the issuance of the writ of error coram nobis.
Jones v. State, 130 Fla. 645, 178 So. 404. The same ground was again used in the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by petitioner in the Circuit Court of Union County, Florida, and was held insufficient to warrant the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus by both the CircuitFlorida, and was held insufficient to warrant the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus by both the Circuit Court Judge and the Supreme Court of Florida. See Jones v. Mayo, 139 Fla. 400, 190 So. 615. In a concurring opinion in Jones v. State, 130 Fla. 645, 178 So. 404, 405, Justice Brown of the Supreme Court of Florida pointed out "that there was other evidence in the case sufficient to have supported the judgment of conviction, such as the sworn confession of the defendant." Petitioner...