State v. Powell

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Powell

314 So. 2d 787, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13616

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 7, 1975

DocketNo. 73-518

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 314 So. 2d 787 (State v. Powell) 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. Powell, 314 So. 2d 787, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13616 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.

The State appeals the dismissal of three informations charging the appellee with assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree.

Appellee moved to dismiss the informa-tions upon two grounds, to wit, that the State was collaterally estopped to prosecute the informations by reason of a prior finding by a jury verdict in a first degree murder trial arising out of the same criminal episode that appellee was not guilty by reason of insanity; also, that the prosecutions were barred by the provisions of the speedy trial rule. The trial court held that the State was collaterally estopped from prosecuting the charges under the case of Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469. The trial court did not specifically rule on the applicability of the speedy trial rule.

We hold that the State was prohibited from prosecuting all three charges for failure to comply with the speedy trial rule. State v. Boren, Fla.App.3d 1973, 273 So.2d 415.

In addition, the trial judge was eminently correct in holding that the State was collaterally estopped from prosecuting the two charges alleging assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree of Officer Clark and Officer Morrow.

[788]*788For the foregoing reasons the orders appealed are

Affirmed.

GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.

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

HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.

The State appeals the dismissal of three informations charging the appellee with assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree.

Appellee moved to dismiss the informa-tions upon two grounds, to wit, that the State was collaterally estopped to prosecute the informations by reason of a prior finding by a jury verdict in a first degree murder trial arising out of the same criminal episode that appellee was not guilty by reason of insanity; also, that the prosecutions were barred by the provisions of the speedy trial rule. The trial court held that the State was collaterally estopped from prosecuting the charges under the case of Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469. The trial court did not specifically rule on the applicability of the speedy trial rule.

We hold that the State was prohibited from prosecuting all three charges for failure to comply with the speedy trial rule. State v. Boren, Fla.App.3d 1973, 273 So.2d 415.

In addition, the trial judge was eminently correct in holding that the State was collaterally estopped from prosecuting the two charges alleging assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree of Officer Clark and Officer Morrow.

[788]*788For the foregoing reasons the orders appealed are

Affirmed.

GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

314 So. 2d 787, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-powell-fladistctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack