Slayton v. State
| Decision Date | 28 May 1932 |
| Citation | 141 So. 875,105 Fla. 586 |
| Parties | SLAYTON et al. v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Dade County; H. F. Atkinson, Judge.
C. K Slayton and Frank Hyde were convicted of murder in the second degree, and they bring error.
Reversed.
COUNSEL Kehoe & Kehoe, Hendricks & Hendricks, and Chappell, Brown & Allen, all of Miami, for plaintiffs in error.
Cary D Landis, Atty. Gen., and Roy Campbell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
In this case the appellants were defendants in the court below, and on an indictment in several counts charging murder in the first degree, were convicted of murder in the second degree.
There are a number of assignments of error, one of which is based upon the alleged improper statements by the state's attorney to the jury in the closing argument of the case. It is unnecessary for us to determine here whether or not those statements constituted reversible error, as the case must be reversed on another ground.
Another assignment is based upon the action and language of the court in reply to counsel for the defendant when objection was made to the alleged improper argument by the state's attorney. This, too, will be passed without comment for the reason above stated.
The record in this case shows that before plea in bar a plea in abatement was filed, which, although quite voluminous, stated in effect that the county commissioners in January of 1930 placed the requisite number of names in the jury box; that in June it appeared that the names in the jury box were about to be depleted, and thereupon a judge of the circuit court of Dade county made the following order:
'It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Board of County Commissioners in and for Dade County be and they are hereby directed to meet forthwith and make out an additional list of five hundred male persons of this County, who are qualified to serve as Jurors, and place said list of names in the jury box as provided by law.'
That on the 30th day of June after the order was made and delivered to the board of county commissioners the county commissioners, without any further order or authority, prepared the names of 969 persons and placed the same in the jury box from which to draw jurors from and after June 30, 1930; that the grand jury returning the indictment against these defendants was drawn from the jury box containing the names of these 969 persons, together with those that remained in the box having been put there in January as above stated.
There are objections made by the plea to the method adopted by the county commissioners in selecting the original list in January which shows irregularities, but it is not necessary for us to discuss that in this opinion.
When the county commissioners, proceeding to act under the order of court above mentioned, instead of placing the names of 500 male persons in the jury box, placed 969 names therein, they thereby fouled the jury box so that no valid jury could be drawn therefrom.
There was demurrer to the plea in abatement which was sustained.
Section 2772, Rev. Gen. St., section 4444, Comp. Gen. Laws, provides the method which must be followed by the board of county commissioners in the preparation of a jury box in January of each year. See Lake v. State, 100 Fla. 367, 129 So. 834. Section 2 of chapter 12069, Acts of 1927, section 4449 Comp. Gen. Laws, provides as follows:
'The circuit judge having jurisdiction of any such county shall be authorized to make an order at any time when the names of persons in the jury box are about to be exhausted, directing the board of county commissioners of such county to meet and make out additional lists of persons to serve as jurors in the manner provided by said section 4444.'
Section 3 of the same act, section 4450...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Custer v. State
...Fla. Statutes of 1941, same F.S.A., mandatorily provide how and when names may be drawn or taken from the jury box. In the case of Slayton v. State, supra, we held that unauthorized removal of names from the jury box will foul the box, and in Livingston v. State, supra, we held that the rem......
-
Davis v. State
... ... the commissioners. Here facts are not distinctly averred ... showing actual participation on the part of the prosecuting ... attorney. The circumstances for the bases of the rulings in ... Taylor v. State, 117 Fla. 706, 158 So. 437, Lake ... v. State, 100 Fla. 367, 129 So. 834, and Slayton v ... State, 105 Fla. 586, 141 So. 875, are not analogous to ... those reflected in defendant's pleas ... In ... Wiggins v. State, 101 Fla. 404, 134 So. 236, we quoted ... with approval the following excerpt from English v ... State, 31 Fla. 340, 12 So. 689, "We must presume ... ...
-
John Ringling Estates, Inc. v. White
... ... benefits could be had at law. When a court of equity assumes ... jurisdiction for one purpose, it will grant full relief. See ... Leesburg State Bank v. Lyle, 99 Fla. 535, 126 So ... 791; Gollnick v. James, 94 Fla. 1231, 115 So. 529; ... Norris v. Eikenberry (Fla.) 137 So. 128; Wolfle ... ...
-
Taylor v. State
...requirement. No grand jury can be drawn and organized except pursuant to the requirements of the statute. In the case of Slayton v. State, 105 Fla. 586, 141 So. 875, this court held that an indictment found by a grand drawn from a box in which the county commissioners placed more additional......