From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State, ex Rel. v. Hardie

Supreme Court of Florida, Division B
Mar 27, 1934
154 So. 183 (Fla. 1934)

Summary

In Hardie, the court held that the defendant's conviction for accessory before the fact was improperly entered prior to the principal's conviction. 154 So. at 183-84.

Summary of this case from Brown v. State

Opinion

Opinion Filed March 27, 1934.

A writ of error to the Circuit Court for Dade County, Paul D. Barns, Judge.

Roach Hoyl and W. M. Pope, for Plaintiffs in Error;

Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, and Roy Campbell, Assistant, for Defendant in Error.


The writ of error in this case is to a judgment in habeas corpus proceedings remanding the petitioners to the custody of the sheriff under capias issued on a judgment entered in the criminal court of record in a certain cause wherein the petitioners were convicted of being accessories before the fact of the crime of uttering a false, forged and counterfeited instrument in writing.

The record shows that the principal adjudged guilty on a plea of guilty of committing the forgery involved was adjudged guilty thereof on the day succeeding the day upon which judgment was entered against these petitioners, although she had pleaded guilty prior thereto.

In Killingsworth v. State, 90 Fla. 299, 105 So. 834, we held:

"An accessory may be placed on trial with his principal and both may be found guilty by the jury, one as principal and the other as accessory, but before a judgment of conviction may be entered against the latter the judgment must be entered against the former. It is true that the conviction of the principals is an essential prerequisite, except in certain cases, to the punishment of the accessory. See Bowen v. State, 25 Fla. 645, 6 South Rep. 459; Ex Parte Bowen, 25 Fla. 214, 6 So.2d Rep. 65; Daughtrey v. State, 46 Fla. 109, 35 So.2d Rep. 397."

On authority of the case above cited, we hold that the judgment remanding the petitioners to the custody of the sheriff was a proper judgment so far as it went, but it should have gone further and remanded the petitioners to the custody of the sheriff to be by him safely kept until the next succeeding term of the criminal court of record and to have them then presented in that court to receive sentence according to law.

For the reasons stated, the cause is remanded to the circuit court with directions that judgment be modified to comply with the suggestion above stated and, when so modified, shall stand affirmed.

It is so ordered.

WHITFIELD, P. J., and BROWN, J., concur.

DAVIS, C. J., and ELLIS and TERRELL, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.


Summaries of

State, ex Rel. v. Hardie

Supreme Court of Florida, Division B
Mar 27, 1934
154 So. 183 (Fla. 1934)

In Hardie, the court held that the defendant's conviction for accessory before the fact was improperly entered prior to the principal's conviction. 154 So. at 183-84.

Summary of this case from Brown v. State
Case details for

State, ex Rel. v. Hardie

Case Details

Full title:STATE, ex rel. R. C. MAUDLIN, alias Leroy Howard, and FREEDA VALLEY v. DAN…

Court:Supreme Court of Florida, Division B

Date published: Mar 27, 1934

Citations

154 So. 183 (Fla. 1934)
154 So. 183

Citing Cases

State v. Peel

The statute here quoted makes the principal in the first or second degree guilty of a substantive felony and…

Brown v. State

We again disagree. In support of his argument, Brown cites Hysler v. State, 136 Fla. 563, 187 So. 261 (1939)…