Ellis v. State

300 So. 2d 273, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8674
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ellis v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 346 So. 2d 1044
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 12, 1974·No. No. 73-930·Published

Opinion

ON MOTION RE BAIL PENDING APPEAL

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, an indigent, is appealing his conviction of shooting into an occupied vehicle and consequent imprisonment for five years. The trial court set bail, pending appeal, in the sum of $20,000. Appellant now seeks relief here from this order setting bail.

It is well settled that excessive bail can be the equivalent of a denial thereof.1 We consider a $20,000 bail as excessive to this extent in the case of an indigent facing maximum imprisonment of five years in the absence of findings sufficient to support an absolute denial of bail pending appeal. Accordingly, the same rules relating to a review of a denial of bail pending appeal applies. In this regard, Rule 6.15, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A., mandates compliance with Younghans v. State.2

[274]*274The motion is granted therefore and the cause is remanded for compliance with Rule 6.15, F.A.R.

McNULTY, Acting C. J., and BOARD-MAN and GRIMES, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ellis v. State, 300 So. 2d 273, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 8674 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

300 So. 2d 273 (Ellis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Ex Rel. Gerstein v. Schulz
180 So. 2d 367 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)
Younghans v. State
90 So. 2d 308 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)
Matera v. Buchanan
192 So. 2d 18 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
Mendenhall, Ex. Rel. v. Sweat
158 So. 280 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1934)
State ex rel. Crabb v. Carson
189 So. 2d 376 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)