State v. Cody

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Cody

650 So. 2d 1030, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 589, 1995 WL 37342

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 1, 1995

DocketNo. 94-684

StatusPublished

This text of 650 So. 2d 1030 (State v. Cody) 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 v. Cody, 650 So. 2d 1030, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 589, 1995 WL 37342 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

The decision previously issued in this case on July 12, 1994, is withdrawn, and this opinion is substituted in its place.

The State seeks reversal of the trial court’s dismissal of a prosecution pursuant to section 948.08(6), Florida Statutes (1993). We treat the prior notice of appeal as a petition for certiorari, see State v. Pettis, 520 So.2d 250 (Fla.1988); State v. Johnson, 306 So.2d 102 (Fla.1974), and determine that the order is void because no information had been filed at the time the dismissal was entered. See Ex Parte Reed, 101 Fla. 800, 135 So. 302 (1931); Zanger v. State, 548 So.2d 746 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Brehm v. State, 427 So.2d 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). We note that the State may still proceed to file an information, and thereafter is entitled to appeal any subsequent dismissal of that information. See Fla.RApp.P. 9.140(c)(1)(A).

Certiorari granted; order quashed.

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

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

The decision previously issued in this case on July 12, 1994, is withdrawn, and this opinion is substituted in its place.

The State seeks reversal of the trial court’s dismissal of a prosecution pursuant to section 948.08(6), Florida Statutes (1993). We treat the prior notice of appeal as a petition for certiorari, see State v. Pettis, 520 So.2d 250 (Fla.1988); State v. Johnson, 306 So.2d 102 (Fla.1974), and determine that the order is void because no information had been filed at the time the dismissal was entered. See Ex Parte Reed, 101 Fla. 800, 135 So. 302 (1931); Zanger v. State, 548 So.2d 746 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Brehm v. State, 427 So.2d 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). We note that the State may still proceed to file an information, and thereafter is entitled to appeal any subsequent dismissal of that information. See Fla.RApp.P. 9.140(c)(1)(A).

Certiorari granted; order quashed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

650 So. 2d 1030, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 589, 1995 WL 37342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cody-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack