State ex rel. Lehman v. Buchanan

190 So. 2d 594, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4930
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 5, 1966
DocketNo. 65-1002
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 190 So. 2d 594 (State ex rel. Lehman 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. Lehman v. Buchanan, 190 So. 2d 594, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4930 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was arrested and charged with drunk driving in the City of Miami, under a traffic ordinance of Metropolitan Dade County which had superseded the city’s traffic ordinance for such offense.1 He sought release on a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court. On hearing, the writ was discharged and the petitioner was remanded to the custody of the respondent sheriff.

Petitioner appealed, contending the ordinance is invalid for insufficiency in its title and because the minimum penalty provided therein is more than the minimum penalty provided in the state law governing such an offense. We hold appellant’s contentions are without merit and affirm. The ordinance is valid under the requirements of title and notice, as set out in § 1.02(b) of the Metro Charter.2 See 62 C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 415; 37 Am.Jur., Municipal Corporations, § 146. The penalties prescribed in the ordinance were within the authority therefor as granted in § 6.15(B) of the Metro Charter. The fact that the penalty prescribed in the ordinance fixed a minimtim higher than the minimum specified in the State law relating to such an offense did not bring the ordinance in conflict with applicable state law within the meaning of the prohibition against such conflicts as contained in subsection (5) of section 11 of Article VIII of the Constitution, F.S.A., the home rule amendment. The conflict provision did not require that the state and Metro penalties be identical.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Pole v. State
198 So. 3d 961 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Metropolitan Dade County v. City of Miami
396 So. 2d 144 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
190 So. 2d 594, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-lehman-v-buchanan-fladistctapp-1966.