State of Florida v. Kevin Pratt

169 So. 3d 252, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9975, 2015 WL 4002330
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 1, 2015
Docket4D15-1077
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 169 So. 3d 252 (State of Florida v. Kevin Pratt) 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 of Florida v. Kevin Pratt, 169 So. 3d 252, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9975, 2015 WL 4002330 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The State of Florida seeks certiorari review of a non-final order which granted a motion by a criminal defendant to disclose the grand jury testimony of a witness. Grand jury testimony ordinarily is kept secret, § 905.24, Fla. Stat. (2014), but exceptions apply. See § 905.27, Fla. Stat. (2014). The State argued that defendant had not asserted a sufficient predicate for disclosure. Alternatively, if the trial court found a sufficient predicate under section 905.27, the State argued that the trial court should examine the testimony in camera to determine its materiality. See James v. Witte, 480 So.2d 253, 255 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Jackman v. State, 140 *253 So.2d 627, 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962); see also Minton v. State, 113 So.2d 361, 367 (Fla.1959). The trial court ordered disclosure without conducting an in camera inspection. We grant the petition, in part, to the extent that we direct the trial court to hold an in camera inspection.

Granted in Part.

CIKLIN, C.J., TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
169 So. 3d 252, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9975, 2015 WL 4002330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-florida-v-kevin-pratt-fladistctapp-2015.