State v. Padron
519 So. 2d 1144, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 479, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 644, 1988 WL 10218
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 16, 1988·No. No. 87-516·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinions
The trial court dismissed the charges against Padrón based on the state’s failure to disclose the identity of the confidential informant. The court found that defendant may have been prejudiced in his ability to present his asserted defense of entrap[1145]*1145ment. We remand the cause for further proceedings to enable the trial court to determine whether the state’s conduct falls within the ruling of Aldazabal v. State, 471 So.2d 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Padron, 519 So. 2d 1144, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 479, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 644, 1988 WL 10218 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).
519 So. 2d 1144 (State v. Padron) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Gonzalez
528 So. 2d 1297 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)