Height v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Height v. State

459 So. 2d 470, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2503, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16391

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 28, 1984

DocketNo. AX-165

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 459 So. 2d 470 (Height 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.

Bluebook

Height v. State, 459 So. 2d 470, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2503, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16391 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinions

SHIVERS, Judge.

Appellant, a prison inmate, was accused of assaulting a fellow inmate with a knife, given Miranda warnings, questioned concerning the incident and placed in administrative detention. Three months later, the appellant was charged with aggravated battery and possession of a weapon by a State prisoner. Appellant moved for discharge of the information alleging that his right to a speedy trial, pursuant to Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.191(a)(1) had been violated as more than 180 days had passed since he was placed in administrative confinement. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm.

The appellant contends that placement in administrative confinement as a result of [471]*471the conduct which later gives rise to charges constitutes an arrest for the purposes of commencing the 180 day speedy trial period. This court has consistently rejected this position. See Powers v. State, 422 So.2d 981 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Lynn v. State, 436 So.2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Turner v. State, 442 So.2d 1064 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

NIMMONS, J., concurs. WENTWORTH, J., dissents with written opinion.

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

SHIVERS, Judge.

Appellant, a prison inmate, was accused of assaulting a fellow inmate with a knife, given Miranda warnings, questioned concerning the incident and placed in administrative detention. Three months later, the appellant was charged with aggravated battery and possession of a weapon by a State prisoner. Appellant moved for discharge of the information alleging that his right to a speedy trial, pursuant to Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.191(a)(1) had been violated as more than 180 days had passed since he was placed in administrative confinement. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm.

The appellant contends that placement in administrative confinement as a result of [471]*471the conduct which later gives rise to charges constitutes an arrest for the purposes of commencing the 180 day speedy trial period. This court has consistently rejected this position. See Powers v. State, 422 So.2d 981 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Lynn v. State, 436 So.2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Turner v. State, 442 So.2d 1064 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

NIMMONS, J., concurs. WENTWORTH, J., dissents with written opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

459 So. 2d 470, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2503, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/height-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack