State v. Ramirez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Ramirez

100 So. 3d 270, 2012 WL 5503999

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 9, 2012

DocketNo. 3D12-2936

StatusPublished

This text of 100 So. 3d 270 (State v. Ramirez) 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. Ramirez, 100 So. 3d 270, 2012 WL 5503999 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Because the trial judge should have disqualified himself, we grant the petition for writ of prohibition. We conclude that the motion for disqualification was legally sufficient, and that the trial judge’s comments were such that the facts alleged would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial. See Livingston v. State, 441 So.2d 1083, 1087 (Fla.1983). Once a basis for disqualification has been established, prohibition is both an appropriate and necessary remedy. Brown v. Rowe, 96 Fla. 289, 118 So. 9 (1928). Accordingly, the writ of prohibition must issue and we direct the trial judge to disqualify himself in all proceedings presently pending in lower court case number F12-19854. We therefore grant the petition for writ of prohibition, but being confident that the trial judge will withdraw, we need not formally issue the writ.

Petition granted.

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

PER CURIAM.

Because the trial judge should have disqualified himself, we grant the petition for writ of prohibition. We conclude that the motion for disqualification was legally sufficient, and that the trial judge’s comments were such that the facts alleged would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial. See Livingston v. State, 441 So.2d 1083, 1087 (Fla.1983). Once a basis for disqualification has been established, prohibition is both an appropriate and necessary remedy. Brown v. Rowe, 96 Fla. 289, 118 So. 9 (1928). Accordingly, the writ of prohibition must issue and we direct the trial judge to disqualify himself in all proceedings presently pending in lower court case number F12-19854. We therefore grant the petition for writ of prohibition, but being confident that the trial judge will withdraw, we need not formally issue the writ.

Petition granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 So. 3d 270, 2012 WL 5503999, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ramirez-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack