M.N. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

M.N. v. State

272 So. 3d 465

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 27, 2019·No. No. 3D18-735·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See M.F. v. State, 255 So.3d 519, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (When reviewing the adequacy of a Richardson hearing, a "ruling that no [discovery] violation occurred moots any inquiry into whether there was procedural prejudice."); see also Mascolo v. State, 774 So.2d 827, 829 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) ("[T]he trial court found there was no discovery violation. We find that the record supports the decision of the trial court and therefore we find no error.").

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See M.F. v. State, 255 So.3d 519, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (When reviewing the adequacy of a Richardson hearing, a "ruling that no [discovery] violation occurred moots any inquiry into whether there was procedural prejudice."); see also Mascolo v. State, 774 So.2d 827, 829 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) ("[T]he trial court found there was no discovery violation. We find that the record supports the decision of the trial court and therefore we find no error.").

M.N. v. State, 272 So. 3d 465 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

272 So. 3d 465 (M.N. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related