State Ex Rel. Recio v. Simpson

Supreme Court of Florida

State Ex Rel. Recio v. Simpson

10 So. 2d 909, 152 Fla. 104, 1942 Fla. LEXIS 710

DecidedDecember 18, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 10 So. 2d 909 (State Ex Rel. Recio v. Simpson) 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

State Ex Rel. Recio v. Simpson, 10 So. 2d 909, 152 Fla. 104, 1942 Fla. LEXIS 710 (Fla. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

BUFORD, J.:

Appeal brings for review judgment of remand in habeas corpus proceedings.

*105 The burden is on the appellants to make it clearly appear that the trial judge, committed error, which burden they failed to carry. See White v. White, 108 Fla. 380, 149 So. 375.

The penal clause of the ordinance under which appellants were alleged to have been convicted does not appear in the record. Sub-section (h) of Section 28, Chapter 7672, Laws of Florida, as amended by Chapter 16567, Special Acts of 1913, and Chapter 17596, Special Acts of 1935, confer on the respondent municipality power to impose both fine and imprisonment for violation of municipal ordinances. The imprisonment imposed is within the limit of the periods fixed by statute, supra.

For the reasans stated, we cannot determine affirmatively that reversible error was committed. Ferlita v. Jones, 50 Fla. 218, 39 So. 593.

Judgment is affirmed.

So ordered.

BROWN, C. J., WHITFIELD, and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

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