Bentzel v. State
This text of 365 So. 2d 441 (Bentzel v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Gary E. BENTZEL, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Alvin E. Entin, Miami, Manuel James, Key West, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Jeffrey Samek, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, KEHOE and SCHWARTZ, JJ.
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
The defendant appeals from a judgment which denied his petition for habeas corpus and ordered his extradition to Pennsylvania. The record shows that the Governor's rendition warrant which formed the basis of the extradition proceeding was never introduced into evidence at the hearing below. We hold, on the authority of Di Piero v. State, 300 So.2d 700 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1974) and Simpson v. Woodham, 332 So.2d 693 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976) that the warrant was indispensable, and that the failure to introduce it was fatal, to the state's case. The judgment below is therefore reversed and the cause remanded with directions to discharge the defendant.
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
365 So. 2d 441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bentzel-v-state-fladistctapp-1978.