State Ex Rel. v. Love, (1940)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 7
Judges: PER CURIAM.
Attorneys: B.K. Roberts and Weldon G. Starry, for Petitioner;
George Couper Gibbs, Attorney General, William Fisher, Jr.,
Assistant Attorney General, and Orin C. Parker, Jr., State Attorney, for Respondent.
Filed: Aug. 02, 1940
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: In a petition for a writ of prohibition it is in effect alleged that in the Circuit Court for Leon County a motion to quash several informations charging criminal offenses, filed under the statute predicated upon matters in pais, was overruled by the trial court when it should have been sustained to establish immunity of the petitioner from prosecution under the statutes of the State. The petition for writ of prohibition is signed by the petitioner and his counsel. The petition is not sworn to b
Summary: In a petition for a writ of prohibition it is in effect alleged that in the Circuit Court for Leon County a motion to quash several informations charging criminal offenses, filed under the statute predicated upon matters in pais, was overruled by the trial court when it should have been sustained to establish immunity of the petitioner from prosecution under the statutes of the State. The petition for writ of prohibition is signed by the petitioner and his counsel. The petition is not sworn to by..
More
I concur in the judgment solely on the ground that the petition for writ of prohibition is not properly verified to warrant the court in assuming jurisdiction to enter an order of prohibition.
The allegations of the petition, had they been properly verified, are entirely sufficient to warrant the issuance of a rule nisi.
We are not reviewing the order of the circuit court overruling the motion to quash. This we may only do on writ of error to final judgment. Nevertheless, as copy of such motion is attached to and made a part of the petition for writ of prohibition, the Court in the majority opinion, has taken occasion to point out that motions to quash made upon grounds formerly presented by pleas in abatement must be positively verified by the defendant and has held that the record here shows that the motion filed in the circuit court was not so verified. Without such verification, such motion is of no avail.
Source: CourtListener
