State v. Luis

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Luis

949 So. 2d 277, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1426, 2007 WL 397193

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 7, 2007

DocketNo. 4D06-2072

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 949 So. 2d 277 (State v. Luis) 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. Luis, 949 So. 2d 277, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1426, 2007 WL 397193 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

On Motions for Rehearing

PER CURIAM.

We deny the motions for rehearing in this case, but withdraw our opinion filed on October 4, 2006, and substitute the following in its place.

We grant the State’s petition for writ of certiorari and quash the May 8, 2006 order of the Broward Circuit Court, consolidating the pending criminal prosecution before it with ongoing proceedings in the Dade Circuit Court and transferring the case to Miami-Dade County for further proceedings. In the two cases, the charges included racketeering, organized scheme to defraud, intent to sell legend drugs and related offenses. The trial court consolidated the cases “in the interest of judicial economy” and because “the overarching schemes” were the same. The State argues that the Broward case charged conduct different from that committed in Dade County. Based on our review, the trial court’s consolidation and [278]*278effective change of venue from Broward to Dade County constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law resulting in irreparable harm. See § 910.03,. Fla. Stat. (2006); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.151, 3.240.

Accordingly, the petition is granted and the underlying order quashed. We note that nothing in the rules precludes a double jeopardy challenge if respondents are subsequently tried in Broward County for charges identical to those in Miami-Dade.

STEVENSON, C.J., KLEIN and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

On Motions for Rehearing

PER CURIAM.

We deny the motions for rehearing in this case, but withdraw our opinion filed on October 4, 2006, and substitute the following in its place.

We grant the State’s petition for writ of certiorari and quash the May 8, 2006 order of the Broward Circuit Court, consolidating the pending criminal prosecution before it with ongoing proceedings in the Dade Circuit Court and transferring the case to Miami-Dade County for further proceedings. In the two cases, the charges included racketeering, organized scheme to defraud, intent to sell legend drugs and related offenses. The trial court consolidated the cases “in the interest of judicial economy” and because “the overarching schemes” were the same. The State argues that the Broward case charged conduct different from that committed in Dade County. Based on our review, the trial court’s consolidation and [278]*278effective change of venue from Broward to Dade County constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law resulting in irreparable harm. See § 910.03,. Fla. Stat. (2006); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.151, 3.240.

Accordingly, the petition is granted and the underlying order quashed. We note that nothing in the rules precludes a double jeopardy challenge if respondents are subsequently tried in Broward County for charges identical to those in Miami-Dade.

STEVENSON, C.J., KLEIN and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

949 So. 2d 277, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 1426, 2007 WL 397193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-luis-fladistctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack