Sexton v. State
643 So. 2d 53, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9309, 1994 WL 523426
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 28, 1994·No. No. 94-03167·Published·Cited by 4 cases
Opinion
Petitioner seeks certiorari review of the circuit court’s order compelling him to provide reciprocal discovery of matters pertaining to the penalty phase of this capital case. He essentially contends that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220 does not apply to the penalty phase of a trial. We disagree and concur with our sister court’s holding in Booker v. State, 634 So.2d 301 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).
Petition denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sexton v. State, 643 So. 2d 53, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9309, 1994 WL 523426 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).
643 So. 2d 53 (Sexton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bailey v. State
100 So. 3d 213 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Davis v. State
73 So. 3d 304 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)
State v. Clark
644 So. 2d 556 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Sturge v. LCS Development Corp.
643 So. 2d 53 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)