Zygula v. State
| Decision Date | 16 March 1951 |
| Citation | 51 So.2d 287 |
| Parties | ZYGULA v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Howard M. Duncanson, Hollywood, for appellant.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and Reeves Bowen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant was informed against, tried and convicted for operating a gambling room. A motion for new trial was denied and the defendant was sentenced to pay a fine of $500 or in default thereof, to be confined at hard labor in the county jail for sixty days. This appeal is from the judgment so imposed.
It is concluded, (1) that the search and seizure of defendant's goods and premises was illegal, (2) that the evidence to connect defendant with the ownership and operation of the place alleged to be used as a gambling house, was illegal and insufficient, and (3) the evidence as to previous alleged gambling operations charged to defendant was illegal and should not have been admitted.
As to the legality of the search and seizure, it is sufficient to say that the record and the evidence have been examined and it appears that the seizure was made as an incident to the arrest of defendant but it was preceded by ample showing that he was in charge of the premises, that he was using it for gambling purposes and from what the officers who made the arrest have observed, they were fully authorized to make the arrest and the seizure.
Questions challenging the legality of the evidence as to previous gambling operations on the part of appellant, and in fact all other assignments relied on by him, are ruled by Freed v. State, 100 Fla. 900, 130 So. 459; See also Driggers v. State, 90 Fla. 324, 105 So. 841.
The judgment appealed from is therefore affirmed on authority of the Freed case.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Smith
... ... State, Fla.App.1959, 112 So.2d 391. See also Beck v. State, Fla.App.1966, 181 So.2d 659; Smith v. State, Fla.App.1966, 187 So.2d 354 ... The conviction does not depend upon evidence that was obtained by an unreasonable search and seizure. See Zygula v ... State, Fla.1951, 51 So.2d 287. This case is unlike Boynton v. State, Fla.1953, 64 So.2d 536, where evidence was suppressed because it had been obtained during an exploratory search while trespassing upon the premises. In this case, the officers knew that the vehicle contained contraband ... ...
-
Rinehart v. State, 1096
...v. State, Fla.App.1959, 112 So.2d 391; Pegueno v. State, Fla.1956, 85 So.2d 600; Rodriguez v. State, Fla.1952, 58 So.2d 164; Zygula v. State, Fla.1951, 51 So.2d 287; and Brown v. State, Fla.1950, 46 So.2d 479. In addition to the search without a search warrant upon the defendant's arrest, t......
-
Schiele's Estate, In re
... ... (Emphasis supplied.) ... Section 731.07, F.S.A., governs the execution of wills in the State of Florida. Our statutes which require wills to be in writing and signed by the testator 'at the end thereof' are almost identical on the point in ... ...