State v. Wiebe

816 So. 2d 817, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6748, 2002 WL 999477
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 17, 2002
DocketNo. 5D01-343
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 816 So. 2d 817 (State v. Wiebe) 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. Wiebe, 816 So. 2d 817, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6748, 2002 WL 999477 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s order suppressing Appellant’s April 11, 2000 statement to deputies of the Citrus County Sheriffs Office is affirmed. However, our review of the record reveals that weekend first appearance hearings in Citrus County are not steno-graphically or electronically reported. The failure to report such hearings violates Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.070(g)(1) which provides that: “[a]ll criminal and juvenile proceedings, and any other judicial proceedings required by law or court rule to be reported at public expense, shall be reported.” The Chief Judge of the Fifth Judicial Circuit should promptly implement procedures to ensure compliance with Rule 2.070(g)(1) at all criminal and juvenile proceedings, including weekend first appearance hearings.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, C.J., COBB and ORFINGER, R. B., JJ., concur.

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

Related

Coley v. State
816 So. 2d 817 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
816 So. 2d 817, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6748, 2002 WL 999477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-wiebe-fladistctapp-2002.