Judges: CHAPMAN, J.
Attorneys: Morley Darby and J. Montrose Edrehi, for Plaintiff in Error;
Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, Tyrus A. Norwood, Assistant Attorney General, E.D. Beggs, Jr., State Attorney, and Philip D. Beall, for the State.
Filed: Mar. 04, 1938
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: On August 7, 1937, plaintiff in error, Mary Vann, was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court of Santa Rosa County, Florida, as an accessory before the *Page 689 fact in an attempt to commit murder in the first degree. The crime was alleged to have been committed in Escambia County, Florida, on April 1, 1936. Plaintiff in error was informed against in the Court of Record of Escambia County by its prosecuting officer, R.H. Merritt, County Solicitor, under date of April 10, 1936. The cause, on mo
Summary: On August 7, 1937, plaintiff in error, Mary Vann, was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court of Santa Rosa County, Florida, as an accessory before the *Page 689 fact in an attempt to commit murder in the first degree. The crime was alleged to have been committed in Escambia County, Florida, on April 1, 1936. Plaintiff in error was informed against in the Court of Record of Escambia County by its prosecuting officer, R.H. Merritt, County Solicitor, under date of April 10, 1936. The cause, on mot..
More
The information really charged the defendant with being an accessory before the fact to the crime of attempting to commit murder in the first degree, whereas the principals alleged in the information had been acquitted of the crime alleged and their pleas of guilty to a lesser offense accepted. The mere allegation in the information that the defendant was charged with a
"substantive felony" is a mere conclusion of the pleader, which is rebutted by the specific facts alleged. The motion to quash the information as framed should in my opinion have been granted. I must therefore dissent in part from the foregoing opinion. The defective information could perhaps have been cured by the filing of a new and legally sufficient one, but as I see it the information upon which the defendant was tried was fatally defective.
