H.T. v. State

458 So. 2d 802, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2250, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15828
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 23, 1984·No. No. 83-1282·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The adjudication of delinquency under review is reversed for a new hearing because the lower court improperly failed to hold a Richardson1 hearing prior to admitting incriminating statements allegedly made by the respondent and not previously revealed by the state in discovery. Cumbie v. State, 345 So.2d 1061 (Fla.1977); Balboa v. State, 446 So.2d 1134 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). The state’s contentions that the defense was on prior notice of the statements, see Leeman v. State, 357 So.2d 703 (Fla.1978), or acquiesced in the court’s ruling, see Lucas v. State, 376 So.2d 1149 (Fla.1979), are totally unsustained by the record.

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

H.T. v. State, 458 So. 2d 802, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2250, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15828 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

458 So. 2d 802 (H.T. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

S.G. v. State
518 So. 2d 964 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)