Alfrey v. State
435 So. 2d 971, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 22400
Opinion
During the hearing on appellant’s motions to suppress and to dismiss, his counsel stipulated that the issues were dispositive and that he would not need a jury. The state argues that by these actions appellant’s counsel waived appellant’s right to a speedy trial. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.191. We disagree. See State v. Ansley, 349 So.2d 837 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).
Reversed and remanded with directions to discharge appellant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Alfrey v. State, 435 So. 2d 971, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 22400 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).
435 So. 2d 971 (Alfrey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Ansley
349 So. 2d 837 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)