Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Stacey v. Cochran

Stacey v. Cochran

664 So. 2d 974, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9356, 1995 WL 504528
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 25, 1995
DocketNo. 95-2831
StatusPublished

This text of 664 So. 2d 974 (Stacey v. Cochran) 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.

Bluebook
Stacey v. Cochran, 664 So. 2d 974, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9356, 1995 WL 504528 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

At petitioner’s arraignment, the trial court sua sponte increased petitioner’s bond, because the state filed a notice of intent to seek habitual offender status of the petitioner. The trial court ordered the petitioner in custody and gave his attorney only fifteen minutes to prepare for a bond hearing. Since the trial court did not comply with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.131(g) and there is no other provision for the trial court to increase a bond, we grant the writ and remand for proceedings consistent with that rule. See Lambert v. State, 151 So.2d 675 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963).

GLICKSTEIN, WARNER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Lambert v. State
151 So. 2d 675 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
664 So. 2d 974, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9356, 1995 WL 504528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stacey-v-cochran-fladistctapp-1995.