Reyes v. State
| Decision Date | 27 July 1894 |
| Citation | 15 So. 875,34 Fla. 181 |
| Parties | REYES v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to circuit court, St. Johns county; R. M. Call, Judge.
James Reyes was convicted of improperly printing books and pamphlets, in violation of Rev. St. § 2620, and brings error. Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
1. An indictment under section i620, Rev. St., which charges the accused with publishing and distributing an obscene paper containing an obscene figure or picture, should set out such paper in haec verba, or give such description of the same as decency permits.
2. An indictment which fails to give such description of the obscene paper, figure, or picture as is prescribed in the preceding headnote, and fails to give any description of the same sufficient to advise the defendant of the nature of the charge and accusation against him, is fatally defective, and such defect is not cured by a verdict of guilty.
3. Our statute (section 2892, Rev. St.) which provides that an indictment shall be adjudged good which charges a crime substantially in the language of the statute was not intended to obviate the necessity of stating the circumstances which constitute the definition of the offense charged, when necessary to advise the prisoner of the nature of the charge against him.
4. The indictment in this case seeks to charge the defendant with publishing and distributing an obscene paper containing an obscene figure or picture. It does not set out the paper figure, or picture in haec verba, or by any certain description, or give any excuse for failure to do so. Held that said indictment was vague, indefinite, and uncertain that it charged no offense; that it exposed the defendant to a second prosecution for the same offense; and that no judgment should be entered upon a conviction obtained upon the same.
M. C. Jordan and W. A. MacWilliams, for plaintiff in error.
William B. Lamar, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The plaintiff in error was indicted under section 2620 of the Revised Statutes of Florida, against improperly printing etc., obscene books, pamphlets, papers, etc. The indictment, after omitting the preliminary part thereof, was in the following words: 'That one James Reyes, late of the county of St. Johns and state of Florida, on the 23d day of January, in the year of our Lord 1894, in the county and state aforesaid, did then and there print, publish, and distribute certain printed and written paper containing obscene language and an obscene figure or picture, manifestly tending to the corruption of the morals of youth, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the state of Florida.'
A trial was had at the spring term, 1894, of the circuit court of St Johns county, at which the defendant was convicted. A number of assignments of error are made, predicated upon various rulings of the circuit court. Upon the view we take of the case, it is only necessary to pass upon one of them, which is the ninth, and relates to the refusal of the court below to grant defendant's motion in arrest of judgment. Among the grounds of this motion we need to pass only upon the third, fourth, and fifth. In substance, all of these grounds alleged that the indictment is insufficient; that it does not charge any offense under the laws of the state of Florida, and does not apprise the defendant of the true character of the charge intended therein so as to enable him to prepare his defense; and that it was not so framed as to protect the defendant from a second prosecution for the same offense. All of these objections were well taken. The motion should have been granted, and the judgment arrested. The indictment wholly fails to set out in haec verba, or to give any description whatever of, the alleged 'printed and written paper containing obscene language and an obscene figure or picture,' which it charges the defendant with printing, publishing, and distributing. The authorities are practically unanimous that such an indictment is insufficient. The case assimilates itself very much to a charge of forgery, in which the alleged paper or instrument must be set out in haec verba, or according to its tenor. Some of the authorities hold that the paper, in a case of this kind, must be set out in haec verba,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Koppala v. State
...it is not waived by failure to take advantage thereof at any preliminary stage of the proceedings. (People v. Ross, 103 Cal. 425; Reyes v. State, 34 Fla. 181; State Garvey, 11 Minn. 154; Newcomb v. State, 37 Miss. 397; State v. Nunley, 185 Mo. 182; People v. Gregg, 59 Hun, 107; 8 Pl. & Pr.,......
-
Adams v. Culver
...by § 847.01, supra. It is true that the charge was inartificially and, perhaps, defectively drawn under that statute, cf. Reyes v. State, 1894, 34 Fla. 181, 15 So. 875. But it is well settled that habeas corpus cannot be used as a substitute for a motion to quash or for an appeal. Kelly v. ......
-
Smith v. Chase
... ... any advertisement, pamphlet, representation or letter ... concerning any said land or subdivision contains any ... written state ment that is false or fraudulent, issues, ... circulates, publishes or distributes the same, or shall ... cause the same to be issued, published or ... required by section 11 of the Declaration of Rights of the ... state Constitution; therefore the information is fatally ... defective. See Reyes v. State, 34 Fla. 181, 15 So ... 875; Hamilton v. State, 30 Fla. 229, 11 So. 523; ... Stevens v. State, 18 Fla. 903; Grant v ... State, 35 Fla ... ...
-
Simpson v. State
...so that the accused may be advised of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. Mills v. State, 58 Fla. 74, 51 So. 278; Reyes v. State, supra; Hamilton v. State, 16 288; State ex rel. Moir v. Mayo, 121 Fla. 202, 163 So. 521. We are of the opinion therefore that the information was......