Tubb v. Mayo
| Decision Date | 10 May 1937 |
| Citation | 128 Fla. 190,174 So. 325 |
| Parties | TUBB v. MAYO. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Original proceeding in habeas corpus by George L. Tubb against Nathan Mayo, as custodian of the state prison.
Prisoner remanded to custody with directions.
COUNSEL Martin & Martin, of Plant City, for petitioner.
Cary D Landis, Atty. Gen., and Roy Campbell and James B. Watson Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent.
This is an original proceeding in habeas corpus.
Petitioner was convicted in the criminal court of record of Orange county, Fla., on the 9th day of December, 1933, under the first and second counts of an information, which counts were as follows:
It is contended that the conviction is void because the first count of the information charges no offense under the laws of Florida and the defendant could not be sentenced to a period of imprisonment in the state prison under the second count. The latter contention is entirely correct, but would be immaterial were it not for the fact that the record shows that the court adjudged the defendant guilty of the crime of 'breaking and entering and petit larceny.' There is no such crime known to the laws of Florida. There is a crime which may be designated 'breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony' or 'breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor' (Comp.Gen.Laws 1927, § 7216 et seq.), both of which are felonies, and another crime known as 'petit larceny' (Comp.Gen.Laws 1927, § 7224).
If he was convicted under the first count of the information, the defendant in this case was found guilty by the jury of breaking and entering a certain building, the property of W F. Connell, with intent to commit a feloney, to wit, grand larceny, which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. State
...v. State, 100 Fla. 370, 129 So. 832; Sallas v. State, 98 Fla. 464, 124 So. 27; Finch v. State, 116 Fla. 437, 156 So. 489; Tubb v. Mayo, 128 Fla. 190, 174 So. 325. Appellant, his counsel, has stated several questions, but only argues the 1st and 2nd questions and thereby waives all others. T......
-
State v. Bruno
...Fla.1950, 49 So.2d 521 (see also State v. Clein, Fla.1957, 93 So.2d 876); State v. Andres, 1941, 148 Fla. 742, 5 So.2d 7; Tubb v. Mayo, 1937, 128 Fla. 190, 174 So. 325 (information charged offense in the language of the statute and therefore did not 'entirely fail' to charge the offense); D......
-
Jones v. State
... ... information charging a crime substantially as defined by ... statute is sufficient. See Finch v. State, 116 Fla ... 437, 156 So. 489; Tubb v. Mayo, 128 Fla. 190, 174 ... So. 325. In drafting indictments and informations the words ... of the statute should be observed and followed. The ... ...
-
Hitson v. Mayo
...of particulars timely presented by motion, the defendant will not be released from custody in a habeas corpus proceeding. Tubb v. Mayo, 1937, 128 Fla. 190, 174 So. 325; Sweat v. Pettis, 1946, 158 Fla. 104, 27 So.2d Since we have already stated that the information charged the crime delineat......