Bernard Montgomery v. State

150 So. 3d 1231, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18844, 2014 WL 6460697
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 19, 2014·No. 4D14-3522·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant petitions for a writ of prohibition following the circuit judge’s denial of the defendant’s motion to disqualify the judge. Based on our review of the petition and motion, we issued an order to the state to show cause why we should not grant the petition. The state candidly has responded that it can find no such cause. *1232 We conclude the petition has merit and grant the petition. See Gore v. State, 96.4 So.2d 1257, 1268 (Fla.2007) (“The standard for determining the legal sufficiency of a motion to disqualify is whether the facts alleged, which must be assumed to be true, would cause the movant to have a well-founded fear that he or she will not receive a fair trial at the hands of that judge.”). The defendant’s cases shall be re-assigned to another circuit judge.

Petition granted.

TAYLOR, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bernard Montgomery v. State, 150 So. 3d 1231, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18844, 2014 WL 6460697 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

150 So. 3d 1231 (Bernard Montgomery v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fetzner v. State
219 So. 3d 834 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)