From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frappied v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
May 1, 1964
163 So. 2d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)

Opinion

No. 4481.

May 1, 1964.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sarasota County, John D. Justice, J.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

James W. Kynes, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Robert R. Crittenden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.


The order here appealed, denying appellant's claim for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, must be reversed and the cause remanded for consideration in light of this court's decision and opinion in Caminita v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 159 So.2d 921, filed some months after entry of the order in this cause.

The text of the appealed order and the scant record in this court intimate that appellant may, in fact, not be in custody under a sentence of the lower court. If, after the hearing necessary upon remand of the cause, this should be shown to be true, relief under Rule No. 1 in the court below would not be available.

Reversed and remanded.

ALLEN, Acting C.J., and SHANNON and WHITE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Frappied v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
May 1, 1964
163 So. 2d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)
Case details for

Frappied v. State

Case Details

Full title:LEO ALFRED FRAPPIED, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: May 1, 1964

Citations

163 So. 2d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)

Citing Cases

Nabozny v. State

The relief contemplated by Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1 applies only to prisoners "in custody" under…

McCormick v. State

We must agree with appellee's contention that Criminal Rule 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, is not available to…