Lail v. State

314 So. 2d 234, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13733
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 13, 1975·No. No. 74-1364·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant being in gross violation of Rule 3.200, F.R.Cr.P., and there being no good cause displayed to support a court waiver of its requirements, it is our view that the trial court correctly administered the Rule within the allowable limits of his discretion in excluding defendant’s alibi witness. Chester v. State, 276 So.2d 76 (2d DCA Fla.1973). See Williams v. State, 264 So.2d 106 (4th DCA Fla.1972).

Affirmed.

WALDEN and MAGER, JJ„ and GRID-LEY, WILLIAM C., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Lail v. State, 314 So. 2d 234, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13733 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

314 So. 2d 234 (Lail v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Austin v. State
461 So. 2d 1380 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Lewis v. State
411 So. 2d 880 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Garcia v. State
380 So. 2d 565 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)