State ex rel. Ball v. Buchanan

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State ex rel. Ball v. Buchanan

185 So. 2d 510, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5270

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 26, 1966

DocketNo. 66-257

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 185 So. 2d 510 (State ex rel. Ball v. Buchanan) 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

State ex rel. Ball v. Buchanan, 185 So. 2d 510, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5270 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus and remanding the petitioner, Robert Wilbur Ball, to the custody of the Sheriff of Dade County, Florida.

The petitioner, essentially, desires to be released on bond pending his trial on charges of the first degree murder of his wife, Regina Ball, and one Daniel D. Nash. His petition is grounded on Section 9, Declaration of Rights, Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., which provides:

“All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenc-es where the proof is evident or the presumption great.”

The petitioner contends that he shot and killed the parties in self defense after Nash [511]*511had shot him twice. After a full eviden-tiary hearing, the trial court found that the proof was evident and the presumption great as to the guilt of the petitioner.

We have carefully reviewed the transcript of record and the briefs, and have heard oral argument of counsel. The petitioner having been charged with a capital offense is entitled to a speedy hearing, but the burden is on him to take the initiative and show from the evidence that the proof of his guilt is not “evident or the presumption great.” Larkin v. State, Fla.1951, 51 So.2d 185. He failed to carry this burden, and we therefore find that the trial court was correct in denying his application for bail.

The order of the trial court is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus and remanding the petitioner, Robert Wilbur Ball, to the custody of the Sheriff of Dade County, Florida.

The petitioner, essentially, desires to be released on bond pending his trial on charges of the first degree murder of his wife, Regina Ball, and one Daniel D. Nash. His petition is grounded on Section 9, Declaration of Rights, Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., which provides:

“All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenc-es where the proof is evident or the presumption great.”

The petitioner contends that he shot and killed the parties in self defense after Nash [511]*511had shot him twice. After a full eviden-tiary hearing, the trial court found that the proof was evident and the presumption great as to the guilt of the petitioner.

We have carefully reviewed the transcript of record and the briefs, and have heard oral argument of counsel. The petitioner having been charged with a capital offense is entitled to a speedy hearing, but the burden is on him to take the initiative and show from the evidence that the proof of his guilt is not “evident or the presumption great.” Larkin v. State, Fla.1951, 51 So.2d 185. He failed to carry this burden, and we therefore find that the trial court was correct in denying his application for bail.

The order of the trial court is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 So. 2d 510, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-ball-v-buchanan-fladistctapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack