Porter v. State

• Decision Date: 17 October 1911
• Citation: 62 Fla. 79,56 So. 406
• Parties: PORTER v. STATE.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

56 So. 406

62 Fla. 79

PORTER v. STATE.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

October 17, 1911

Error to Circuit Court, Jackson County; William H. Price, Judge.

Application by Cannon Porter for habeas corpus. From an order dismissing the writ and ordering the defendant held by the sheriff, the applicant brings error. Affirmed, with directions.

Additional Syllabus by Editorial Staff

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Where the charge upon which a defendant has been convicted does not constitute an offense within the jurisdiction of the court to try, the defendant may in habeas corpus proceedings be discharged from the sentence; but, if the defendant is also in custody under a valid warrant for his arrest, he may be held for commitment or bail or trial as the law directs.

COUNSEL

Calhoun & Campbell, for plaintiff in error.

Park Trammell, Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

WHITFIELD C.J.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the court of a justice of the peace in Jackson county upon a charge that he did 'steal, take and carry away two hogs,' the property of 'named persons,' contrary to the statute, etc. He was sentenced to pay a fine of $100, or to serve six months in the county jail at hard labor. A writ of habeas corpus was applied for upon the ground that the petitioner was illegally held under the sentence because 'neither the affidavit charging him with the offense nor the evidence showed the value of the property so as to give to the said justice of the peace final jurisdiction of said cause.' The order of the circuit court in the habeas corpus proceeding was that 'after hearing the evidence and the argument of the respective counsel, * * * the said writ be and the same is hereby dismissed and the defendant is ordered held by the sheriff.' A writ of error was allowed by the circuit judge under the statute.

Section 22 of article 5 of the Constitution as amended ordains that 'the justices of the peace shall have jurisdiction, * * * in such criminal cases except felonies, as may be prescribed by law.' Justices of the peace have the power of committing magistrates in criminal cases. The circuit courts have jurisdiction of all criminal cases not cognizable by inferior courts. Section 11, art. 5.

Section 3898 of the General Statutes of 1906 provides that: 'In counties where there are no county courts or criminal courts of record justices of the peace shall have power to hold a court to try and determine all misdemeanors committed in their respective districts punishable by fine not exceeding five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.'

Section 3302 of the General Statutes provides that 'whoever commits larceny by stealing any hog or hogs of less value than twenty dollars the property of another, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months or by fine not exceeding one hundred dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment.' In Jackson county there is no county court or criminal court of record.

If the charge upon which the defendant was tried constituted no offense within the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace to try, the justice of the peace was without jurisdiction to impose the sentence under which the defendant petitioner is held in custody, and he may be discharged on habeas corpus. See Ex parte Bailey, 39 Fla. 734, 23 So. 552; Ex parte Hays 25 Fla. 279, 6 So. 64; Ex parte Knight, 52 Fla. 144, 41 So 786, 120 Am. St. Rep. 191.

Where a person is tried in a court of limited jurisdiction for a criminal offense, the charge should show that the offense alleged to have been committed was one within the jurisdiction of the court to try. In such a case where the charge fails to show that the court has jurisdiction of the offense alleged, such charge is fatally defective, and unless it appears by the record of the trial that the court did...