Case Name: Lawrence G. SANGAREE, Jr., Petitioner, v. Raymond HAMLIN, Sheriff of Leon County, Florida, Respondent
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1970-05-13
Citations: 235 So. 2d 729
Docket Number: No. 39488
Parties: Lawrence G. SANGAREE, Jr., Petitioner, v. Raymond HAMLIN, Sheriff of Leon County, Florida, Respondent.
Judges: CARLTON and BOYD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 235
Pages: 729–735

Head Matter:
Lawrence G. SANGAREE, Jr., Petitioner, v. Raymond HAMLIN, Sheriff of Leon County, Florida, Respondent.
No. 39488.
Supreme Court of Florida.
May 13, 1970.
Rehearing Denied June 23, 1970.
William F. Daniel, of Cotten, Shivers, Gwynn & Daniel, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Reeves Bowen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Opinion:
ADKINS, Justice.
In an original proceeding, petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus releasing him from custody on the ground no preliminary hearing was granted petitioner prior to the return of an indictment charging him with murder in the first degree.
Petitioner alleges that he was arrested at 1:00 a. m., on Monday, February 2, 1970, in Franklin County, Florida, and was interrogated repeatedly for a number of hours in Franklin County and Leon County without benefit of counsel and without benefit of warning of his constitutional right to remain silent. Petitioner admitted at oral argument that an indictment was returned by the Grand Jury on Friday, February 6, 1970.
The complaints of petitioner are quite similar to those of Palmieri in Palmieri v. State, 198 So.2d 633 (Fla.1967), where the Court held that detention of a defendant for ten days upon an arrest without a warrant and without being taken before a magistrate was improper, but reversal of his conviction was not required under the circumstances.
The purpose of Fla.Stat. § 901.23, F.S.A., is to require an officer, after arrest and without unnecessary delay, to make or cause to be made an affidavit before a magistrate upon which a warrant should issue, or give the prosecuting attorney sufficient evidence upon which an information can be filed. The custom of making arrests without warrant and confining a prisoner in jail for an indefinite time before applying for and obtaining the issuance of a warrant is condemned. See Milton v. Cochran, 147 So.2d 137 (Fla.1962).
However, a preliminary hearing is not a step in due process of law and is not a prerequisite to a criminal prosecution or the filing of an indictment or information. Baugus v. State, 141 So.2d 264 (Fla. 1962), cert den., 371 U.S. 879, 83 S.Ct. 153, 9 L.Ed.2d 117.
The delay between an arrest without warrant and the appointment of counsel could have an important bearing upon the admissibility of an ad interim confession. The questions raised by the petition for writ of habeas corpus are more appropriately raised during the trial of the case for review upon appeal in the event of a verdict adverse to the petitioner. Under the principles set forth in Palmieri v. State, supra, the allegations of the petition are insufficient. The petition is, therefore,
Denied.
CARLTON and BOYD, JJ., concur.
THORNAL, J., concurs in opinion and judgment with opinion.
ERVIN, C. J., dissents with opinion.