Thompson v. CochranThompson v. Cochran
Thе petitioner filed a petition for habeas corpus in this court containing allegations which, if true, would bе sufficient to justify his release from imprisonment under the provisions of F.S. Section 932.38, F.S.A. requiring notification to a pаrent or guardian prior to the trial of an offense against a minor. The following uncontroverted facts appear in both the petition and the return.
On or about October 29, 1955, the petitioner, then an unmarried minor, wаs arrested in Polk County, Florida on two criminal charges, one for breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony and the other for grand larceny. Shortly after his arrest he wrote a letter to one of his sisters at Norfolk, Virginia informing her of his arrest and of the criminal charges pending against him. The petitioner’s mother, then domiciled at Doraville, Georgia, was visiting in Norfolk at the time the letter was received and was promptly advised of its contents. Upon the return of petitioner’s mother to Georgia a few days later, she called anothеr sister of the petitioner who resided in Tampa, Florida by long distance telephone and asked that she do what she could to help the petitioner. It appears that the sister from Tampa did actually sеe the accused in jail prior to the imposition of any sentence on him.
On October 31, 1955, the petitionеr pleaded guilty to an information charging him with the offenses mentioned above.
On November 8, 1955, the petitionеr pleaded guilty in the circuit court of Highlands County, Florida to another information which charged him with breaking and еntering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. On November 10, 1955, the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Highlands County wrote a letter to thе petitioner’s mother advising her that her son was to be brought before the court in said county on November 28, 1955 bn thrеe charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit misdemeanors.
Additionally, it is contended by the respondent and not controverted by the petitioner that between the time of the petitioner’s pleas of guilty аnd his sentencing, the Florida Parole Commission caused an investigation to be conducted which included interviеws with petitioner’s mother and two of his sisters.
Other than as recited above, it does not appear that рetitioner’s mother received any notice of the pending charges. The petitioner’s father passed away prior to the period in question.
The respondent first contends that the actual notice received by the petitioner’s mother in the letter written shortly after his arrest is sufficient to obviate the necеssity of compliance with F.S. Section 932.38, F.S.A. on authority of Bowen v. Cochran, Fla.,
Although we have held that strict compliance with the terms of the statute is not required where actual notice is received by the parеnt or guardian, we do not believe that principle to be applicable in this case. The letter was written shortly after peti
Respondent next contends that because petitioner’s mother had actual notice оf the offenses between the time of peti-tionér’s pleas of guilty but before he was sentenced that the requirements of the statute may be dispensed with. In support of this proposition respondent cites Canizio v. Pеople of State of New York,
It follows that the petitioner’s detention under the pretended judgments is illegal, and he must be discharged. However, he shall be retained in custody by the respondent to be by him held and safely kept until the further order of the appropriate court on the charges of the informations pursuant to which he was originally incarcerated. Cash v. Culver, Fla.,
It is so ordered.