Whidden v. State
Decision Date | 18 November 1947 |
Citation | 32 So.2d 577,159 Fla. 691 |
Parties | WHIDDEN v. STATE. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Glades County; W. T Harrison, judge.
Whitaker Brothers, of Tampa, Bell & Bell, of Miami, and Mary Schulman, of Okeechobee, for petitioner.
Mabry Reaves, Carlton, Anderson Fields & Ward, of Tampa, and Earl D. Farr, of Punta Gorda for respondent.
The controlling question for us to determine on this petition for certiorari is whether or not an order of the county judge quashing an affidavit purporting to charge a criminal offense of which the county judge had trial jurisdiction is reviewable by the circuit court on appeal by the state.
The state's right to appeal is purely statutory, and is found in Sections 924.07 and 924.08, Fla.Stat.1941, same F.S.A.
Section 924.07 is as follows:
'924.07. Appeal by state.--An appeal may be taken by the state from:
'(1) An order quashing an indictment or information or any count thereof;
'(2) An order granting a new trial;
'(3) An order arresting judgment;
'(4) A ruling on a question of law adverse to the state where the defendant was convicted and appeals from the judgment;
'(5) The sentence, on the ground that it is illegal;
'(6) Judgment discharging prisoner on habeas corpus.'
Section 924.08 is as follows:
We must gather the legislative intent from the language used and the purpose to be accomplished.
We hold that it was the evident legislative intent, as evidenced by the two sections above quoted, to extend to the state the right of appeal in all cases where the trial court shall quash the formal charge made in such court so having trial jurisdiction.
To hold otherwise would be to determine that the legislature intended to accord to the state the right to appeal from the county judges court, in cases where that court has trial jurisdiction, of an order granting a new trial, an order arresting judgment or a ruling on a question of law adverse to the stat where the defendant was convicted and appealed from the judgment, and yet not accord the state the right to appeal from the most adverse order the trial court could enter. If the state cannot appeal from an order quashing the formal charge made against the defendant, then the state's hands are tied at the very inception of the prosecution, and there is no relief from such adverse ruling. The result would be that in counties having no county court or criminal court of record or court of crimes the prosecution of all misdemeanors punishable by fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months could be ambushed at the court house door by the county judge holding the state on which the prosecution is based, to be unconstitutional. We do not think the legislature intended this result.
We construe the word 'information,' as used in the statute, to mean the formal complaint required to be made in a...
To continue reading
Request your trial- State v. Morrison
- State v. Morrison
-
State v. Creighton
...identified as appealable by the state in criminal cases. 4 In dismissing the state's appeal, the district court cited Whidden v. State, 159 Fla. 691, 32 So.2d 577 (1947), which held that the state's right of appeal in criminal cases is purely statutory. Thus the district court indicated tha......
-
State v. G.P.
...the constitutional changes, the court, in Brown, supra, relied upon the supreme court decision thirty years earlier in Whidden v. State, 159 Fla. 691, 32 So.2d 577 (1947), which stated that the right of the state to appeal from final judgments in criminal cases was entirely statutory. While......