State v. Patsas

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Patsas

60 So. 3d 1152, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 6762, 2011 WL 1810606

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 13, 2011·No. No. 5D10-2844·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s sua sponte order dismissing a 1985 felony charge filed against Anastasios Patsas. The record reflects that the State did not receive notice or an opportunity to be heard prior to the rendition of the order of dismissal. The fundamental requisites of due process of law are notice and the opportunity to be heard. See, e.g., Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314, 70 S.Ct. 652, 94 L.Ed. 865 (1950).

ORDER OF DISMISSAL QUASHED.

SAWAYA, TORPY and EVANDER, JJ, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s sua sponte order dismissing a 1985 felony charge filed against Anastasios Patsas. The record reflects that the State did not receive notice or an opportunity to be heard prior to the rendition of the order of dismissal. The fundamental requisites of due process of law are notice and the opportunity to be heard. See, e.g., Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314, 70 S.Ct. 652, 94 L.Ed. 865 (1950).

ORDER OF DISMISSAL QUASHED.

SAWAYA, TORPY and EVANDER, JJ, concur.

State v. Patsas, 60 So. 3d 1152, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 6762, 2011 WL 1810606 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

60 So. 3d 1152 (State v. Patsas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related