State v. Rodriguez

566 So. 2d 521, 1990 WL 58258
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 8, 1990
Docket88-2429
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 566 So. 2d 521 (State v. Rodriguez) 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. Rodriguez, 566 So. 2d 521, 1990 WL 58258 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

566 So.2d 521 (1990)

The STATE of Florida, Appellant,
v.
Radhames RODRIGUEZ, Appellee.

No. 88-2429.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 8, 1990.

*522 Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Joan L. Greenberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Radhames Rodriguez, in pro per.

Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and LEVY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The State of Florida appeals the trial court's dismissal for lack of prosecution of the charges against defendant Rodriguez. We reverse.

Defendant pled not guilty to the charge of possession of cocaine. His first trial resulted in a hung jury and the trial court declared a mistrial. The trial court retained the exhibits. When the case was called for trial, the defense requested a continuance. Although the state objected, on the ground that its chemist had flown in for the trial and postponement would create a hardship, the trial court granted the continuance. The next time the trial court called the case for trial, the state announced that it was ready but asked to have the cocaine released so that its new chemist could analyze it. Defense counsel moved to dismiss for lack of prosecution and the trial court dismissed the case. The state appeals.

The state properly asserts that dismissal of charges for lack of prosecution is too severe a sanction to impose in this case. Dismissal of charges against a defendant is an extreme sanction to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. State v. Pautier, 548 So.2d 709 (Fla.3d DCA 1989); State v. Saldarriaga, 486 So.2d 683 (Fla.3d DCA 1986); State v. Thomas, 519 So.2d 1091 (Fla.2d DCA 1988); State v. King, 372 So.2d 1126 (Fla.2d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So.2d 758 (Fla. 1980); see also State v. Alvarez, 258 So.2d 24 (Fla.3d DCA 1972) (dismissal for lack of prosecution must be substantiated by the record). Here, there is no showing that defendant would have been prejudiced by a short continuance attributable to the state; a prior continuance of greater length was occasioned by defense counsel. King. Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal and remand for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

State v. T.G.
990 So. 2d 1183 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
State v. Hellmond
683 So. 2d 524 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
State v. Sherman
637 So. 2d 995 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
566 So. 2d 521, 1990 WL 58258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-rodriguez-fladistctapp-1990.