Legal Opinion

Petersen v. Mayo

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided May 5, 1953PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MATHEWS, Justice.

This is a habeas corpus proceeding growing out of the conviction of the petitioner under the provisions of F.S. § 836.05, F.S.A.

The petitioner questions the sufficiency of the information and of the proof. Defects in an information- ,are not subject to attack in a habeas corpus proceeding , unless the defects are of such magnitude that the information utterly fails to charge . any crime or offense under the laws of the State of Florida. See Locklin v. Pridgeon, 158 Fla. 737, 30 So.2d 102; Ex parte Stirrup, 155 Fla. 173, 19 So.2d 712; Ritter v. Sinclair, 154 Fla. 272, 17 So.2d…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Locklin v. PridgeonSupreme Court of Florida · 1947
  2. Ex Parte: Charles Franklin StirrupSupreme Court of Florida · 1944
  3. Atkinson v. PowledgeSupreme Court of Florida · 1936
  4. Ritter v. SinclairSupreme Court of Florida · 1944
  5. Craton v. SinclairSupreme Court of Florida · 1943

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Adams v. CulverSupreme Court of Florida · 1959
  2. State v. McInnesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1963
  3. Hitson v. MayoSupreme Court of Florida · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API