Ex Parte C. S. Howe

Supreme Court of Florida

Ex Parte C. S. Howe

143 So. 299, 106 Fla. 646, 1932 Fla. LEXIS 1081

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided September 6, 1932·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It having been conceded by the Attorney General that the petitioner herein should be discharged *647 from custody because of a defect in substance in the statement of the criminal charge attempted to be made out by the warrant of detention, and because o'f such defect no crime is sufficiently charged against the petitioner to warrant his detention, it is ordered by the Court that petitioner be discharged from the custody of the respondent Sheriff.

Petitioner discharged.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

It having been conceded by the Attorney General that the petitioner herein should be discharged *647 from custody because of a defect in substance in the statement of the criminal charge attempted to be made out by the warrant of detention, and because o'f such defect no crime is sufficiently charged against the petitioner to warrant his detention, it is ordered by the Court that petitioner be discharged from the custody of the respondent Sheriff.

Petitioner discharged.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.

Ex Parte C. S. Howe, 143 So. 299, 106 Fla. 646, 1932 Fla. LEXIS 1081 (Fla. 1932).

Pincite

143 So. 299 (Ex Parte C. S. Howe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.