City of North Miami v. Rogers

Miami-Dade County Circuit Court

City of North Miami v. Rogers

14 Fla. Supp. 101

CourtCircuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Miami-Dade County

DecidedDecember 11, 1958

DocketNo. 4568

StatusPublished

This text of 14 Fla. Supp. 101 (City of North Miami v. Rogers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Miami-Dade County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of North Miami v. Rogers, 14 Fla. Supp. 101 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

HAROLD R. VANN, Circuit Judge.

This court has heard argument of counsel for the respective parties and has examined the record and the authorities involved and is of the opinion that the conviction in this case should be reversed.

The defendant’s appeal is from a conviction on a charge of driving an automobile while under the influence of liquor by the municipal court of the city of North Miami, and raised certain questions, one of which appears to merit discussion in this opinion.

The defendant contends on appeal that she was denied the opportunity to adequately prepare a defense against the charges for that, upon proper motion, the city of North Miami refused to produce for inspection a copy of the drunkometer report which had been taken by the city of North Miami police department. Defendant filed a motion to quash the warrant, and among other grounds again raised this issue. The motion to quash was also denied.

It appears to the court that this question is analogous to and controlled by Jencks v. The United States, 353 U. S. 657, 77 Sup. Ct. 1007, 1 L. Ed. 2d 1103. In the Jencks case the petitioner was. prosecuted for filing a non-Communist affidavit with the National Labor Relations Board upon which he was convicted. The Supreme Court held that the defendant was entitled to an order directing the Government to produce for inspection all reports of two Government witnesses to the Feberal Bureau of Investigation touching [102]*102upon events and activities as to which they testified at the trial, and that the defendant was entitled to inspect such reports and decide whether to use them in his defense.

It is accordingly ordered that the conviction is reversed, and it is further ordered that the city of North Miami is hereby directed to pay to appellant’s attorney of record, E. S. Corbett, III, the amount of the fine, $200, which was paid under protest and served as a supersedeas in this cause.

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

HAROLD R. VANN, Circuit Judge.

This court has heard argument of counsel for the respective parties and has examined the record and the authorities involved and is of the opinion that the conviction in this case should be reversed.

The defendant’s appeal is from a conviction on a charge of driving an automobile while under the influence of liquor by the municipal court of the city of North Miami, and raised certain questions, one of which appears to merit discussion in this opinion.

The defendant contends on appeal that she was denied the opportunity to adequately prepare a defense against the charges for that, upon proper motion, the city of North Miami refused to produce for inspection a copy of the drunkometer report which had been taken by the city of North Miami police department. Defendant filed a motion to quash the warrant, and among other grounds again raised this issue. The motion to quash was also denied.

It appears to the court that this question is analogous to and controlled by Jencks v. The United States, 353 U. S. 657, 77 Sup. Ct. 1007, 1 L. Ed. 2d 1103. In the Jencks case the petitioner was. prosecuted for filing a non-Communist affidavit with the National Labor Relations Board upon which he was convicted. The Supreme Court held that the defendant was entitled to an order directing the Government to produce for inspection all reports of two Government witnesses to the Feberal Bureau of Investigation touching [102]*102upon events and activities as to which they testified at the trial, and that the defendant was entitled to inspect such reports and decide whether to use them in his defense.

It is accordingly ordered that the conviction is reversed, and it is further ordered that the city of North Miami is hereby directed to pay to appellant’s attorney of record, E. S. Corbett, III, the amount of the fine, $200, which was paid under protest and served as a supersedeas in this cause.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 Fla. Supp. 101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-north-miami-v-rogers-flacirct11mia-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack