Roach v. Keep
Decision Date | 12 May 1917 |
Citation | 75 So. 528,73 Fla. 1048 |
Parties | ROACH, Chief of Police v. KEEP. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Duval County; Daniel A. Simmons, Judge.
Habeas corpus proceeding by Arthur Keep against F. C. Roach, Chief of Police. Judgment discharging the petitioner, and defendant brings error. Dismissed.
Syllabus by the Court
A writ of error to a judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding issued by the clerk of the circuit court, without the allowance thereof either by the judge who heard the cause or by a justice of the Supreme Court, is a nullity.
COUNSEL Odom, Crawford & Butler and L. S. Gaulden, all of Jacksonville, for plaintiff in error.
F. D Brennan, of Jacksonville, for defendant in error.
In habeas corpus proceedings ceedings the petitioner was discharged. The chief of police took writ of error to the judgment by filing a praecipe therefor with the clerk of the circuit court who issued the writ. The statute provides:
That in habeas corpus proceedings Section 2257, Gen. Stats. 1906, Compiled Laws 1914.
A writ of error to a judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding issued by the clerk of the circuit court, without the allowance thereof either by the judge who heard the cause or by a justice of the Supreme Court, is a nullity. State ex rel Porter v. Vinzant, 49 Fla. 130, 38 So. 366; Wright v. State, 32 Fla. 472, 14 So. 43; Hardee v. Brown, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Wilson v. Quigg
...equitable proceedings, as a reading of Chapter 79 of the Florida Statutes of 1941, F.S.A., will show. See in this connection Roach v. Keep, 73 Fla. 1048, 75 So. 528. The holding in that decision was complied with in this application for writ of error having been made to and allowed by the C......
-
Mccann v. Proskauer
...the amount and conditions of a supersedeas bond. The court could have denied a writ of error; it was within its power. See Roach v. Keep, 73 Fla. 1048, 75 So. 528; State ex rel. Porter v. Vinzant, 49 Fla. 130, 38 366. The petition was not defective. It alleged that the petitioner was the fa......
- Anderson v. Harrison