Shorter v. State

419 So. 2d 420, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21177
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 21, 1982·No. No. 81-2509·Published

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Judge.

The sole point raised by the appellant in this cause, in which he was certified by the juvenile division for trial as an adult, claims the right to discharge under the speedy trial rules. We conclude that the 90 day period provided by Fla.R.Juv.P. 8.180(a) was rendered inapplicable by an order correctly extending the time under Fla.R. Juv.P. 8.180(d) because the juvenile did not appear after being properly summoned. Compare L.G. v. State, 405 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). For the same reason, the 180 day adult period did not bar the trial because the defendant was not “continuously available for trial” under either the pre- or post- January 1, 1981 version of Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.191(e).1

Affirmed.

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

Shorter v. State, 419 So. 2d 420, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21177 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

419 So. 2d 420 (Shorter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

L. G. v. State
405 So. 2d 252 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)