Fleming v. State

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Fleming v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 227 So. 3d 1254
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 7, 2018·No. 18-1647·Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed November 7, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D18-1647 Lower Tribunal Nos. 18-8009 & 12-29042 ________________

Janis Fleming, Petitioner,

vs.

The State of Florida, Respondent.

A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Veronica A. Diaz, Judge.

Law Offices of Grey and Mourin, and Jason Grey and Lana Cucchiella, for petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Marlon J. Weiss, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ, and LOGUE, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Although the trial court properly decided the other issues on review, the

circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it ruled it was

legally barred from viewing the videotape of the altercation at the heart of this

matter, as the State commendably concedes. Precisely because the county court

expressly based its factual finding on a determination that the videotape

contradicted the testimony of the defendant, the circuit court should have included

a review of the videotape in deciding whether the county court’s fact finding was

supported by any competent substantial evidence.

Petition granted.

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

Fleming v. State, (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).

Fleming v. State (Fleming v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.