State ex rel. Savage v. Kaplan

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State ex rel. Savage v. Kaplan

297 So. 2d 868, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6903

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 21, 1974

DocketNo. 74-131

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 297 So. 2d 868 (State ex rel. Savage v. Kaplan) 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

State ex rel. Savage v. Kaplan, 297 So. 2d 868, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6903 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

ANDERSON, ALLEN C., Associate Judge.

Appellant was charged with the violation of municipal ordinances on March 4, 1973. More than 90 days later these charges were scheduled to be tried before the appropriate municipal court. No formal attempt was made in municipal court to raise the question of entitlement to a speedy trial.

Prior to trial time in municipal court appellant demanded a trial by jury which caused the charges to be transferred to the county court for trial. In county court appellant moved for discharge under 3.191, FRCrP, 33 F.S.A., on the grounds he had been denied a speedy trial in the municipal court. The county judge denied the discharge and appellant filed a suggestion for writ of prohibition in circuit court for the reason “ . . . that the Relator’s right to a speedy trial within 90 days of the date of his arrest has been violated.”

The issuance of the writ was denied and appellant has appealed that denial. We find no error in the refusal to issue the writ. The county court clearly had jurisdiction to try the matter transferred.

Whether 3.191, FRCrP, provides procedural or substantive rights need not be discussed. That rule by its very language did not govern proceedings in municipal courts.

Affirmed.

CROSS and MAGER, JJ., concur.

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

ANDERSON, ALLEN C., Associate Judge.

Appellant was charged with the violation of municipal ordinances on March 4, 1973. More than 90 days later these charges were scheduled to be tried before the appropriate municipal court. No formal attempt was made in municipal court to raise the question of entitlement to a speedy trial.

Prior to trial time in municipal court appellant demanded a trial by jury which caused the charges to be transferred to the county court for trial. In county court appellant moved for discharge under 3.191, FRCrP, 33 F.S.A., on the grounds he had been denied a speedy trial in the municipal court. The county judge denied the discharge and appellant filed a suggestion for writ of prohibition in circuit court for the reason “ . . . that the Relator’s right to a speedy trial within 90 days of the date of his arrest has been violated.”

The issuance of the writ was denied and appellant has appealed that denial. We find no error in the refusal to issue the writ. The county court clearly had jurisdiction to try the matter transferred.

Whether 3.191, FRCrP, provides procedural or substantive rights need not be discussed. That rule by its very language did not govern proceedings in municipal courts.

Affirmed.

CROSS and MAGER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

297 So. 2d 868, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-savage-v-kaplan-fladistctapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack