Pauling v. Simmons

Supreme Court of Florida

Pauling v. Simmons

157 So. 504, 117 Fla. 210, 1934 Fla. LEXIS 1229

DecidedNovember 9, 1934

StatusPublished

This text of 157 So. 504 (Pauling v. Simmons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pauling v. Simmons, 157 So. 504, 117 Fla. 210, 1934 Fla. LEXIS 1229 (Fla. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This was a habeas corpus case brought to determine the legality of an order of imprisonment entered against petitioner for an alleged contempt committed against the County Court of Okeechobee County. Petitioner has failed to file brief herein although notified by the clerk that a brief was desired by the Court.

Whereupon a short and cursory examination of the officer’s return in a habeas corpus case which petitioner has failed or refused to brief in support of a motion for his' discharge, it does not clearly appear that the imprisonment complained of is unlawful or unauthorized byi the authority for detention exhibited in the return, the Supreme Court will dismiss the proceedings at the cost of the petitioner and will remand him to the custody- from which he came.

Dismissed and prisoner remanded.

DaVis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

This was a habeas corpus case brought to determine the legality of an order of imprisonment entered against petitioner for an alleged contempt committed against the County Court of Okeechobee County. Petitioner has failed to file brief herein although notified by the clerk that a brief was desired by the Court.

Whereupon a short and cursory examination of the officer’s return in a habeas corpus case which petitioner has failed or refused to brief in support of a motion for his' discharge, it does not clearly appear that the imprisonment complained of is unlawful or unauthorized byi the authority for detention exhibited in the return, the Supreme Court will dismiss the proceedings at the cost of the petitioner and will remand him to the custody- from which he came.

Dismissed and prisoner remanded.

DaVis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 So. 504, 117 Fla. 210, 1934 Fla. LEXIS 1229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pauling-v-simmons-fla-1934.