Vannoy v. State of Florida

115 So. 510, 94 Fla. 1175
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided January 4, 1928·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The information in this case attempted to charge an offense under Sec. 5438, Revised General Statutes. It does not set out the “printed paper containing obscene prints, figures and pictures,” by any certain description, or give any excuse for failure to do so. This ease must be reversed upon the authority of the case of Reyes v. The State, 34 Fla. 181, 15 So. 875, cited with approval in the la$f paragraph of the opinion in the case of Smith v. Chase, 91 Fla. 1044, 109 So. 94. The indictment in this case is practically identical in its language with the indict *1176 ment held bad, on motion in arrest of judgment, in the case of Reyes v. The State, above cited.

Reversed.

Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur. Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion.

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

Vannoy v. State of Florida, 115 So. 510, 94 Fla. 1175 (Fla. 1928).

115 So. 510 (Vannoy v. State of Florida) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Johnson v. State
351 So. 2d 10 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1977)
Spears v. State
175 So. 2d 158 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1965)
State v. Barnes
117 S.E.2d 849 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1961)
Kittleson v. State
9 So. 2d 807 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1942)
Simpson v. State
176 So. 515 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)