Tootle v. State, (1929)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 12
Judges: PER CURIAM. —
Attorneys: Zewadski Pierce, for Plaintiff in Error;
Fred H. Davis, Attorney General, and Roy Campbell, Assistant, for the State.
Filed: Sep. 26, 1929
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: The transcript of the record in this case does not contain any judgment of conviction. What appears to have been considered as such a judgment is nothing more than the sentence of the court. There is no adjudication by the court of the guilt of the defendant of the *Page 470 crime for which the plaintiff in error was convicted by the jury in the trial court. There is, therefore, no such final judgment as will support a writ of error. See Maniscalco v. State, decided at the present time, and case
Summary: The transcript of the record in this case does not contain any judgment of conviction. What appears to have been considered as such a judgment is nothing more than the sentence of the court. There is no adjudication by the court of the guilt of the defendant of the *Page 470 crime for which the plaintiff in error was convicted by the jury in the trial court. There is, therefore, no such final judgment as will support a writ of error. See Maniscalco v. State, decided at the present time, and cases..
More
The transcript of the record in this case does not contain any judgment of conviction. What appears to have been considered as such a judgment is nothing more than the sentence of the court. There is no adjudication by the court of the guilt of the defendant of the
crime for which the plaintiff in error was convicted by the jury in the trial court. There is, therefore, no such final judgment as will support a writ of error. See Maniscalco v. State, decided at the present time, and cases therein cited. The writ of error must, therefore, be quashed and the cause remanded. It is so ordered.
TERRELL, C. J., AND ELLIS AND BROWN, J. J., concur.
Source: CourtListener
