Christy v. State
This text of 253 So. 3d 1266 (Christy v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The "petition for writ of prohibition habeas corpus, ad prosequendum, mandamus and/or discharge" is denied on the merits. See Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 (providing that the period for speedy trial without demand runs from the date of arrest, and the period for speedy trial upon demand runs from the date of the indictment or information). Here, even though Petitioner was incarcerated on other charges, the arrest warrant related to this case was not executed until August 28, 2018. Thus, the speedy trial period had not begun to run as Petitioner filed the demand for and notice of expiration of speedy trial and motion to discharge before that date.
Makar, Osterhaus, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
253 So. 3d 1266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christy-v-state-fladistctapp-2018.