State v. Noel

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Noel

228 So. 3d 727, 2017 WL 4844921

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 27, 2017·No. Case No. 5D16-4393·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the order dismissing the information based upon the ostensible, permanent incompetency of the defendant because the order was premature. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.213(a)(1); State v. Carey, 212 So.3d 448 (Fla. 3d DGA 2017) (dismissal premature until lapse of five years after determination of incompetency).- We reject Appellee’s contention that dismissal was proper pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.213(a)(2). The record does not support the assertion that Appellee met the statutory definition of “intellectual disability.”

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

TORPY, WALLIS and LAMBERT, JJ.,' concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the order dismissing the information based upon the ostensible, permanent incompetency of the defendant because the order was premature. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.213(a)(1); State v. Carey, 212 So.3d 448 (Fla. 3d DGA 2017) (dismissal premature until lapse of five years after determination of incompetency).- We reject Appellee’s contention that dismissal was proper pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.213(a)(2). The record does not support the assertion that Appellee met the statutory definition of “intellectual disability.”

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

TORPY, WALLIS and LAMBERT, JJ.,' concur.

State v. Noel, 228 So. 3d 727, 2017 WL 4844921 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

228 So. 3d 727 (State v. Noel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related