Long v. Pittman

Supreme Court of Florida

Long v. Pittman

699 So. 2d 1351, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 606, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 1457, 1997 WL 590078

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedSeptember 25, 1997

DocketNo. 91088

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 699 So. 2d 1351 (Long v. Pittman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Long v. Pittman, 699 So. 2d 1351, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 606, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 1457, 1997 WL 590078 (Fla. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Robert Joseph Long has petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus requiring respondent to provide him with “complete original court file or files” from a case in the circuit court of Pasco County. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(5), Fla. Const.

The petition is denied to the extent that it seeks to require respondent to provide petitioner copies of the court file(s) without charge. Petitioner is represented by the Office of the Capital Collateral Representative (CCR), and the records are sought as part of that representation. Therefore, the copies of the court file(s) are to be produced upon payment by CCR of the usual charges for copies of such records charged by respondent. See Porter v. State, 700 So.2d 647 (Fla.1997); Hoffman v. Haddock, 695 So.2d 682 (Fla.1997).

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Robert Joseph Long has petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus requiring respondent to provide him with “complete original court file or files” from a case in the circuit court of Pasco County. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(5), Fla. Const.

The petition is denied to the extent that it seeks to require respondent to provide petitioner copies of the court file(s) without charge. Petitioner is represented by the Office of the Capital Collateral Representative (CCR), and the records are sought as part of that representation. Therefore, the copies of the court file(s) are to be produced upon payment by CCR of the usual charges for copies of such records charged by respondent. See Porter v. State, 700 So.2d 647 (Fla.1997); Hoffman v. Haddock, 695 So.2d 682 (Fla.1997).

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

699 So. 2d 1351, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 606, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 1457, 1997 WL 590078, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/long-v-pittman-fla-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack