Pelaez v. State
Decision Date | 18 October 1932 |
Parties | PELAEZ v. STATE. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Criminal Court of Record, Hillsborough County; W. R Petteway, Judge.
Charles pelaez was convicted of feloniously buying, receiving concealing, and aiding in concealment of stolen property, and he brings error.
Reversed.
COUNSEL Whitaker Brothers, of Tampa, for plaintiff in error.
Cary D Lanids, Atty. Gen., and Roy Campbell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The information herein charges that 'Charles Peleaz late of the County of Hillsborough aforesaid, in the State aforesaid on the 29th day of June in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred thirty one with force and arms at and in the County of Hillsborough aforesaid, Fifteen sacks of sugar, a further description of each of which is to the Acting Solicitor unknown, of the aggregate value of forty-five dollars in money current of the United States of America, the property of O'Berry and Hall Company, a corporation, which had theretofore unlawfully and feloniously been taken, stolen and carried away, and which said property was then and there stolen property, did unlawfully and feloniously buy, receive, conceal and aid in the concealment of said property, the said Charles Pelaez then and there well knowing at the time he so bought, received, concealed and aided in the concealment of said property as aforesaid, that said property was then and there stolen property against the form of the Statute in such case made and provided, to the evil example of all others in the like case offending, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida; wherefore the said Wm. L. Pencke, Acting County Solicitor aforesaid, prosecuting for the State of Florida aforesaid, prays the advice of the Court in the premises and that a capias may be issued forthwith for the arrest of said Charles Pelaez and that he be held for trial under the goregoing information.
'Wm. L. Pencke
'Acting County Solicitor for the County of Hillsborough, Prosecuting for the State of Florida.'
At the trial the following verdict was rendered:
'We the jury find the defendant guilty as charged in the information, and we find the value of the property to be $600.00, so say we all.'
The judgment rendered reads:
'Now on this day came in person the defendant Charles Pelaez and being asked by the Court whether he had anything to say why the sentence of the Court should not now be pronounced upon him, say nothing.
'It is therefore, the judgment, order and sentence of the Court that you Charles Pelaez for the crime of which you have been and stand convicted be confined in the County Jail of IIillsborough County Florida for a period of one year.'
It is contended that the trial court erred in overruling a motion to quash the information because it was signed, sworn to, and filed by an 'Acting County Solicitor' and not by the 'County Solicitor.'
The Constitution provides for the establishment of criminal courts of record in counties 'upon application of a majority of the registered voters in such other counties as the Legislature may deem expedient.' Section 24, art. 5. 'The said Courts shall have jurisdiction of all criminal cases not capital which shall arise in said counties respectively.' Section 25. 'There shall be for each of said Courts a prosecuting attorney, who shall be appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate.' Section 27. 'All offences triable in said Court shall be prosecuted upon information under oath, to be filed by the prosecuting attorney, but the grand jury of the Circuit Court for the county in which said Criminal Court is held may indict for offenses triable in the Criminal Court.' Section 28.
The Constitution also contains the following:
'The Legislature shall provide for the election by the people or appointment by the Governor of all State and county officers not otherwise provided for by this Constitution, and fix by law their duties and compensation.' Section 27, art. 3.
The statutes provide:
'The prosecuting attorney of the criminal court of record shall called the county solicitor, and his powers, duties and obligations shall be the same as those exercised by and imposed upon the State attorney, except when otherwise provided.' Section 8241 (5972), Comp. Gen. Laws.
Section 8247(5974), Comp. Gen. Laws.
The Constitution provides that all offenses triable in a criminal court of record 'shall be prosecuted upon information under oath, to be filed by the prosecuting attorney,' that 'a prosecuting attorney * * * shall be appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate,' and that 'the Legislature shall provide for the election by the people or appointment by the Governor of all State and county officers not otherwise provided for by this Constitution;' and the statute provides that such prosecuting attorney 'shall be called the county solicitor.' Such 'prosecuting...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hall v. State
... ... recognized the authority of the judge of the court to appoint ... [187 So. 400] ... suitable person to perform the duties of the regular ... prosecuting officer in cases of exigency where the latter is ... absent or unable to act. King v. State, 43 Fla. 211, ... 31 So. 254; Pelaez v. State, 107 Fla. 50, 144 So ... This ... case does not present a question of an official delegating ... his authority; it involves the power and authority of the ... state itself to delegate authority to a State Attorney of one ... Circuit to act as such in another Circuit ... ...
-
Kirk v. Baker, 88374
...Florida Statutes (F.S.A.), which provides for the appointment of Acting State Attorneys.'5. This Court under the authority of Pelaez v. State, 144 So. 364, has the authority to appoint an acting 'Prosecuting Attorney' to act under either Section 32.17 Florida Statutes, or 27.16 Florida Stat......
-
Leo v. State, CC--132
...of marketable title and does not purport to govern the character of evidence necessary for a criminal conviction. Pelaez v. State, 107 Fla. 50, 144 So. 364 (1932) presents greater difficulty. There the Supreme Court reversed a similar conviction because ownership of the stolen sugar was not......
-
Dade County v. McCrary
...perform functions in the court or to execute its orders and mandates, When no officer is available for that purpose.' In Pelaez v. State, 107 Fla. 50, 144 So. 364, 365, it was recognized that a court has the inherent power to appoint some suitable person to perform the duties of an official......