Snowden v. Davis

581 So. 2d 243, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5841, 1991 WL 99939
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 13, 1991·No. No. 91-9·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We deny Snowden’s petition for writ of mandamus directed to his former private counsel to obtain a copy of a transcript of criminal proceedings, which may be in the attorney’s possession. If Snowden has not been furnished a complete copy, he may well be entitled to obtain it through other means; i.e., replevin filed in the circuit court. See Dubose v. Shelnutt, 566 So.2d 921 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Florida Rules of Professional Conduct 4-1.16(d). Our denial in this instance is without prejudice to Snowden to pursue other remedies. However, mandamus to this court is inappropriate because Snowden’s attorney is not a “public official.” See Hatten v. State, 561 So.2d 562 (Fla.1990); Puckett v. Gentry, 577 So.2d 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).

Petition for writ of mandamus DENIED.

COBB, W. SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.

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

Snowden v. Davis, 581 So. 2d 243, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5841, 1991 WL 99939 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

581 So. 2d 243 (Snowden v. Davis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

DANNY J. LAROCCO v. STATE OF FLORIDA
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018
Hinson v. McQueen
581 So. 2d 1007 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)