State ex rel. Lee v. Coker
| Decision Date | 18 May 1955 |
| Citation | 80 So.2d 462 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida ex rel. Aubrey LEE, Appellant, v. Broward COKER, as Sheriff of Highlands County, Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Otis Whitehurst, Sebring, for appellant.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and Reeves Bowen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
An information was filed in the Circuit Court of Highlands County charging petitioner with resisting an officer in the lawful discharge of his duty. To this information a plea of guilty was entered on December 2, 1952, upon which the court adjudged petitioner guilty and placed him on probation for a period of one year. December 1, 1953, the court extended the period of probation to June 30, 1954. June 21, 1954, an affidavit was filed before the circuit court alleging violation of the probation. A warrant was issued and served on petitioner who was taken in custody by the sheriff the same day. July 1, 1954, an order was entered revoking petitioner's parole. He was sentenced to serve two years in the state penitentiary at hard labor for the offense to which he had pleaded guilty.
July 16, 1954, petitioner filed his petition for habeas corpus in the circuit court alleging that he was held in jail under a void sentence because he was sentenced after the period of probation had expired and he was sentenced for a violation of his parole committed prior to the extension thereof dated December 1, 1953. July 19, 1954, writ of habeas corpus was issued returnable before the circuit court and a hearing was set for July 26, 1954. July 30, after hearing, the court ordered the writ discharged and remanded petitioner to the custody of the sheriff. This appeal is from the order of remand.
Three questions are urged for determination but in our view they are all encompassed in the question of whether or not when a sentence pursuant to an order of probation is deferred, the court has power to impose sentence for violation of the probation after the probation period has expired, even though the violation took place during said period.
The governing statute is Section 948.06, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hlad v. State
...that facts existed which were necessary to give the court jurisdiction to render the particular judgment. See, e.g., State ex rel. Lee v. Coker, 80 So.2d 462 (Fla.1955). See note 57.17 It is for this reason that there is no "rational connection" for an inference that the defendant had, or w......
-
Jibben v. State
...425 S.E.2d 239 (1992). This rule is especially applicable in an instance in which a warrant has been issued. Gossett; State ex rel. Lee v. Coker, 80 So.2d 462 (Fla.1955); Rome; Sherman; Gibson; Taylor; Hutto; Allen; Lovell v. State, 223 S.C. 112, 74 S.E.2d 570 (1953); Mangus; and State ex. ......
-
Prior v. State
...in a foreign jurisdiction or in concealment until the period of probation has expired. The Supreme Court of Florida, in State ex rel. Lee v. Coker, 80 So.2d 462, 463, held in a similar case as The contention is that when a charge of probation violation is lodged against one and warrant issu......
-
In the Matter of J.A.D.
...term if the hearing is not "unduly delayed." Fennell, 162 Tex. Crim. at 288, 284 S.W.2d at 728-29 (quoting State ex rel. Lee v. Coker, 80 So. 2d 462, 463 (Fla. 1955)). This principle has come to be known as the "due diligence" requirement. See Brecheisen v. State, 4 S.W.3d 761, 763 (Tex. Cr......