Jolly v. Wainwright

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jolly v. Wainwright

175 So. 2d 245, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4194

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 21, 1965

DocketNo. 6176

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 175 So. 2d 245 (Jolly v. Wainwright) 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.

Bluebook

Jolly v. Wainwright, 175 So. 2d 245, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4194 (Fla. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the court on a petition of Robert Jolly for writ of habeas corpus.

It appears that the defendant is in the custody of the Division of Corrections of Florida as a result of judgment and sentence by the Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida. The petitioner alleges that he was apprehended in Kentucky and forcibly brought to Florida for trial, was not extia-dited and did not waive extradition.

A prisoner who has been convicted of a crime and sentenced to imprisonment therefor, after having been given a fair trial in accordance with constitutional procedural safeguards, is not entitled to relief by way of habeas corpus merely because he was brought within the court’s jurisdiction by reason of a “forcible abduction” or by an abuse of legal process. Frisbie v. Collins, 1952, 342 U.S. 519, 72 S.Ct. 509, 96 L.Ed. 541; Hobson v. Crouse, 10 Cir., 1964, 332 F.2d 561; Hunter v. State, Fla.App.1965, 174 So.2d 415, Opinion filed April 27, 1965.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of ha-beas corpus is

Denied.

SMITH, C. J., and SHANNON and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the court on a petition of Robert Jolly for writ of habeas corpus.

It appears that the defendant is in the custody of the Division of Corrections of Florida as a result of judgment and sentence by the Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida. The petitioner alleges that he was apprehended in Kentucky and forcibly brought to Florida for trial, was not extia-dited and did not waive extradition.

A prisoner who has been convicted of a crime and sentenced to imprisonment therefor, after having been given a fair trial in accordance with constitutional procedural safeguards, is not entitled to relief by way of habeas corpus merely because he was brought within the court’s jurisdiction by reason of a “forcible abduction” or by an abuse of legal process. Frisbie v. Collins, 1952, 342 U.S. 519, 72 S.Ct. 509, 96 L.Ed. 541; Hobson v. Crouse, 10 Cir., 1964, 332 F.2d 561; Hunter v. State, Fla.App.1965, 174 So.2d 415, Opinion filed April 27, 1965.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of ha-beas corpus is

Denied.

SMITH, C. J., and SHANNON and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 So. 2d 245, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jolly-v-wainwright-fladistctapp-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack