Petersen v. Mayo
Supreme Court of Florida
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
- Locklin v. PridgeonSupreme Court of Florida · 1947
- Ex Parte: Charles Franklin StirrupSupreme Court of Florida · 1944
- Atkinson v. PowledgeSupreme Court of Florida · 1936
- Ritter v. SinclairSupreme Court of Florida · 1944
- Craton v. SinclairSupreme Court of Florida · 1943
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Adams v. CulverSupreme Court of Florida · 1959
- State v. McInnesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1963
- Hitson v. MayoSupreme Court of Florida · 1957