M.F. v. State
This text of M.F. v. State (M.F. 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed October 10, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D17-2306 Lower Tribunal No. 17-441 ________________
M. F., a juvenile, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Angelica D. Zayas, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Michael W. Mervine, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before SALTER, FERNANDEZ, and LOGUE, JJ.
LOGUE, J. The juvenile defendant argues on appeal that the trial court erred by not
finding procedural prejudice when it conducted a Richardson1 hearing to address
an alleged discovery violation by the State. The trial court initially ruled that the
State had inadvertently committed a discovery violation by not producing the
property receipt for evidence which had been impounded at the scene. However,
the transcript of the adjudicatory hearing demonstrates that after a subsequent
sidebar conference, the court determined that the “document was provided in
discovery. So there’s no violation.” The ruling that no violation occurred moots
any inquiry into whether there was procedural prejudice.
Affirmed.
1 Richardson v. State, 246 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 1971).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
M.F. v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mf-v-state-fladistctapp-2018.