State v. Trujillo

Florida Circuit Courts

State v. Trujillo

37 Fla. Supp. 2d 55

CourtCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida

DecidedNovember 3, 1989

DocketCase No. 87-014 AC

StatusPublished

This text of 37 Fla. Supp. 2d 55 (State v. Trujillo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court for the Judicial Circuits 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. Trujillo, 37 Fla. Supp. 2d 55 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The appellee was charged with violation of right of way, fleeing the scene of an accident, fleeing a police officer, driving with improper or unsafe equipment, driving without a vehicle registration, driving without a valid driver’s license, driving with a suspended driver’s license, and driving under the influence.

The court entered an order granting a motion to compel and [56]*56ordering that upon failure to appear for deposition, the case would be dismissed, (November 18, 1986). The witnesses failed to appear, a motion to dismiss was filed and granted (December 12, 1986). The State is under no obligation to produce witnesses for deposition. (State v Adderly, 411 So.2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)).

Accordingly, the ruling of the lower court is reversed with instructions to reinstate the case and proceed to trial.

NADLER, ROBINSON and GERSTEIN, JJ., concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The appellee was charged with violation of right of way, fleeing the scene of an accident, fleeing a police officer, driving with improper or unsafe equipment, driving without a vehicle registration, driving without a valid driver’s license, driving with a suspended driver’s license, and driving under the influence.

The court entered an order granting a motion to compel and [56]*56ordering that upon failure to appear for deposition, the case would be dismissed, (November 18, 1986). The witnesses failed to appear, a motion to dismiss was filed and granted (December 12, 1986). The State is under no obligation to produce witnesses for deposition. (State v Adderly, 411 So.2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)).

Accordingly, the ruling of the lower court is reversed with instructions to reinstate the case and proceed to trial.

NADLER, ROBINSON and GERSTEIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 Fla. Supp. 2d 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-trujillo-flacirct-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack