Yon v. State
| Decision Date | 27 June 1939 |
| Citation | 190 So. 252,138 Fla. 770 |
| Parties | YON v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Gadsden County; J. B. Johnson, Judge.
Earl Yon was convicted of an offense, and to review a judgment of the circuit court denying a petition for writ of error coram nobis, he brings error.
Writ of error dismissed.
COUNSEL Earl Yon, in pro. per.
George Couper Gibbs, Atty. Gen., and Thomas J. Ellis, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
The transcript of the record presented to this Court in the above stated case is not verified and, theretofore, the cause should be dismissed.
We have examined the transcript, however, and find that it purports to bring for review judgment of the Circuit Court in and for the Second Judicial Circuit of Florida, Gadsden County, denying petition for writ of error coram nobis.
We have examined the petition for the writ and find that it states no valid ground for the issuance of such writ. The allegations of the petition are, in short, that the petitioner was convicted on false testimony; that a witness who testified against him has since admitted that the testimony was false; that he can prove such testimony was false and that his attorney on the trial in which he was convicted failed to file motion for new trial and failed to have his case reviewed in the Supreme Court.
No ground is stated upon which writ of error coram nobis should issue. See Jones v. State, 130 Fla. 645, 178 So. 404; Skipper v. State, 127 Fla. 553, 173 So. 692; Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396, 107 So. 535; Lamb v. Harrison, 91 Fla. 927, 108 So. 671; Jennings v. Pope, 101 Fla. 1476, 136 So. 471; Pike v. State, 103 Fla. 594, 139 So. 196.
The questions attempted to be rpesented on writ of error are frivolous and without merit.
For the reasons stated, writ of error is dismissed.
BROWN and CHAPMAN, JJ., not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Williams
...states: See Ex Parte Gammon (1951) 255 Ala. 502, 52 So.2d 369, 370; Pike v. State (1931) 103 Fla. 594, 139 So. 196, 198; Yon v. State (1939) 138 Fla. 770, 190 So. 252; Dolan v. State (1943) 195 Miss. 154, 13 So.2d 925, 926; Madison v. State (1954) 205 Md. 425, 109 A.2d 96, 100; State v. Eas......
-
Petition of Carvelo
...point are Bolton v. State, 223 Ind. 308, 60 N.E.2d 742, 158 A.L.R. 1057; Beck v. Wallmow, 226 Wis. 652, 277 N.W. 705, and Yon v. State, 138 Fla. 770, 190 So. 252, certiorari denied 308 U.S. 554, 60 S.Ct. 113, 84 L.Ed. In Bolton v. State, the petitioner sought a new trial on the ground that ......
-
Ex parte Williams
...Burns, 247 Ala. 98, 22 So.2d 517; Brown v. State, 250 Ala. 444, 35 So.2d 518; Pike v. State, 103 Fla. 594, 139 So. 196; Yon v. State, 138 Fla. 770, 190 So. 252.' Ex parte Gammon, 255 Ala. 502, 505, 52 So.2d 369, 370. 'However, if the basis of the conviction of petitioner was perjured testim......
-
Ex parte Gammon, 6 Div. 218
...Burns, 247 Ala. 98, 22 So.2d 517; Brown v. State, 250 Ala. 444, 35 So.2d 518; Pike v. State, 103 Fla. 594, 139 So. 196; Yon v. State, 138 Fla. 770, 190 So. 252. We also believe it to be a sound principle that a defendant cannot obtain such nature of relief on account of the neglect, want of......