Marshall v. Moore
Marshall v. Moore
Opinion of the Court
This petition may take the prize for chutspa.
We, of course, find no error in the position of the State. He can hardly claim to be serving a sentence while he has escaped. Neither has he pointed to any provision of law that requires the State to give an escapee “credit” for the time he spends wrongfully outside his prison walls. If, as the poet said, “stone walls do not a prison make,”
WRIT DENIED.
. Chutspa (sometimes spelled chutzpah) has been defined as "presumption-plus-arrogance such as no other word, and no other language can do justice to.” Leo Rosten, The Joys of Yiddish 93 (1968).
. Although he was formally charged with the crime of escape, the charge was dismissed for failure to bring it within the 3-year statute of limitations. To be sure, the dismissal of the criminal charge has no bearing on the power of the Department of Corrections to use the fact of the escape in calculating just how much of the sentence he has actually served, so long as it gives him a hearing to contest the separate, administrative charge that he did in fact escape and remain at large for nearly 10 years. Bretti v. Wainwright, 360 So.2d 1299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Petitioner has been given such a hearing.
. Richard Lovelace, To Althea: From Prison.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.