Pugh v. Bowden

54 Fla. 302
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJune 15, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 54 Fla. 302 (Pugh v. Bowden) 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
Pugh v. Bowden, 54 Fla. 302 (Fla. 1907).

Opinion

Parkhill, J.

— -This is a habeas corpus proceeding-brought by Mrs. C. E. M. Pugh to test the legality of the commitment of Raymond Ingram, by the judge of the criminal court of record of Duval county, to the .state reform school.

The petition for the writ, briefly stated, alleges that the father of Raymond Ingram is well able to care for and support his son, who is a sickly, weak child about fourteen years of age, but he has caused his confinement in the county jail to get rid of the support of the child; that the said child is not charged with crime, and has not been tried and convicted, but. was brought before the criminal court of record upon a petition filed by his father upon the 14th day of September, 1907, and then and there committed by said court to said reform' school, without a trial by jury; ihat the said child [304]*304is not an unusually bad boy, but he is sickly, and his confinement in isaid reform school will result in his death; that the order of said court, committing the child to the reform school is null and void, deprives him of his liberty without authority of law and without a trial by jury.

In support of this petition, there was filed before the circuit judge a certified copy of the petition filed.by the father of Raymond Ingram, in the criminal court of record, and the judgment rendered thereon.

The petition was sworn to and is as follows:

“In the Criminal Court of Record of Duval Count)', Florida.

To the Honorable J. S. Maxwell,

Judge of said Court:

Your petitioner N. D. Ingram represents to your honor:

1st. That he is the father and natural guardian of one Raymond D. Ingram;

2nd. That the said N. D. Ingram has been and is now a kind and loving- father to the said Raymond D. Ingram, and has provided and does now provide the necessaries of life, and for the proper education of the said Raymond D. Ingram, suitable to his station in life.

3rd. That notwithstanding the good treatment above mentioned, Raymond D. Ingram in consequence of incorrigible and vicious conduct is a proper person for the guardianship of the Florida State Reform School, at Marianna, Florida.

4th. That the said Raymond D. Ingram has been guilty of the offenses, to-wit:

(a) On. September nth, 1907, he struck his father N. D. Ingram on the leg with a shoe, without provocation.

[305]*305(b) He constantly abuses, curses and threatens to kill his father, mother and sister and constantly uses profane and obscene language in the presence of his family.

(c) That said Raymond D. Ingram, on the 4th day of September, 1907, did threaten to shoot his father, N. D. Ingram.

(d) That the said Raymond D. Ingram will not work and habitually refuses so to do.

(e) That the said Raymond D. Ingram .constantly plays and loafs on the streets and wdl not come home until late at night.

5th. That the said Raymond D. Ingram has a violent and ungovernable temper and he is under the ag'e of eighteen years and over the age of ten years, to-wit: fourteen years of age.

6th. That the- said Raymond D. Ingram resides in the jurisdiction of this court, to-wit: No. 23 East Church St., Jacksonville, Florida, Duval county.

7th. That your petitioner. N. D. Ingram is unable to manage and control the said Raymond D. Ingram, and he the said petitioner prays that' this honorable court will commit the said Raymond D. Ingram to the guardianship of the Florida State Reform School,' at Marianna, Florida.

N. D. Ingram.”

The judgment thereon is as follows:

“In the 'Criminal Court of Record,

Duval County, Florida.

In re Commitment of Raymond D. Ingram to the State Reform School.

Be It Remembered, That on the 14th day of September, A. D. 1907, Raymond D. Ingram, was, on the complaint of N. D. Ingram brought before me the undersigned judge of the criminal court of record for Duval county, Florida, and upon due proof I do find [306]*306the said Raymond D. Ingram, a.suitable person to be committed to the guardianship of the Florida State Reform School.

Wherefore it is hereby ordered that the said Raymond D1. Ingram be and he is hereby committed to the guardianship- of said institution until he attains the •age of twenty-one years (21) or until he is legally d.s-charged.

Witness my hand this 14th day of September, A. D. 1907.

J. S. Maxwell, Judge.”

The return of the sheriff to the writ states that he holds said Raymond D. Ingram in custody by virtue of a commitment under the seal of the criminal court of record of Duval county. The said commitment, as amended 'by permission of the circuit judge, reads as follows:

Commitment to the State Reform School.

Criminal Court of Record, Duval County, Florida, August Term, A. D. 1907.

Sentenced Sept 14th, A. D. 1907.

•State of Florida, vs. Raymond D. Ingram.

Information for being an Incorrigible.

Be it remembered, that on the 14th day of September, A. D. 1907, Raymond D. Ingram, a resident of said county was, on the complaint of N. D. Ingram, brought before me, the undersigned judge of the criminal court of record, and upon due proof I do find that the said Raymond D. Ingram is a suitable person to be committed to the Florida State Reform School.

Wherefore, it is hereby ordered that the said Ray.mond D. Ingram be and he is hereby committed to [307]*307said, institution until he attains the age of twenty-one years, or until he is legally discharged.

The alternative sentence is..........

Said Raymond D. Ingram, was charged with being an incorrigible; he was born in 1893; his father’s name is N. D. Ingram, and he resides at 23 East Church street, Jacksonville, Florida; that his mother’s name is Ella Ingram; that she is dead. That his near relatives and their residence are as follows: sister, Henrietta Ingram, number 23 East Church street, Jacksonville, Florida.

'Witness my hand this the 14th day of September, A. D. 1907.

John S. Maxwell,

Judg'e Criminal Court of Record.”

On the 23rd day of September, 1907, the circuil judge heard this cause, and remanded the child Raymond Ingram to the custody of the sheriff, and allowed a writ of error to this court, returnable the 19th day of November, 1907.

The ássignments of error present the contentions that the criminal -court of record was without jurisdic-tion of these proceedings, and the judge thereof had no authority to commit Raymond Ingram to the reform school upon petition of his father and without a trial by jury.

Section 1 of Chapter 5388, Laws of 1005, provides: “When a person under the age of eighteen years is convicted before any court of an offence punishable by imprisonment in the county jail, such court may sentence him to the State Reform School, or to such other punishment provided by law for the same offence.”

The jurisdiction of the criminal court and the judge thereof, in committing a person to the State Reform School by virtue of the provisions of this section is not [308]

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

Related

In re Forfeiture of 1978 Chevrolet Van Vin: CGD1584167858
493 So. 2d 433 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
Reed v. State
470 So. 2d 1382 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1985)
Whirley v. State
450 So. 2d 836 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1984)
State v. Webb
335 So. 2d 826 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1976)
State Ex Rel. Jones v. Wiseheart
245 So. 2d 849 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1971)
Cormark v. Coleman
161 So. 844 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1935)
Wissenburg v. Bradley
229 N.W. 205 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1929)
Weinberger v. Board of Public Instruction
112 So. 253 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Harry E. Prettyman, Inc. v. Florida Real Estate Commission
109 So. 442 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1926)
State ex rel. Sellers v. Parker
100 So. 260 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1924)
State Ex Rel. Matacia v. Buckner
254 S.W. 179 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1923)
Cinque v. Boyd
121 A. 678 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1923)
Ex parte Newkosky
116 A. 716 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1920)
State v. . Burnett
102 S.E. 711 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1920)
Ex parte King
217 S.W. 465 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1919)
People v. De Leon
170 P. 173 (California Court of Appeal, 1917)
In re Turner
145 P. 871 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1915)
Lindsay v. Lindsay
257 Ill. 328 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1913)
Board of County Commissioners v. Savage
63 Fla. 337 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 Fla. 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pugh-v-bowden-fla-1907.