Normile v. State
This text of 511 So. 2d 429 (Normile 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.
Opinions
This is an unusual case, in that it involved a recess, unavoidably caused by the illness of the trial judge, of some two weeks after the evidence was closed, until the case resumed with arguments of counsel and instructions to the jury. We believe the concerns expressed by the supreme court in Livingston v. State, 458 So.2d 235 (Fla.1984) concerning the separation of jurors after deliberations have begun apply here as well, and that appellant’s motion for mistrial should have been granted. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
511 So. 2d 429, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1962, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9786, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/normile-v-state-fladistctapp-1987.