Steffey v. State
502 So. 2d 90, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 507, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6654
Opinion
Appellant was convicted of certain drug offenses and appeals. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
Under the facts and posture of this case, it was error for the trial court to deny appellant's motion to’ compel disclosure of the confidential informant, particularly since appellant’s defense was that of entrapment.
We reverse and remand for a new trial upon authority of State v. Hassberger, 350 So.2d 1 (Fla.1977), and Richert v. State, 338 So.2d 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), cert. denied, 346 So.2d 1250 (Fla.1977).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Steffey v. State, 502 So. 2d 90, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 507, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6654 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).
502 So. 2d 90 (Steffey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Richert v. State
338 So. 2d 40 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
State v. Hassberger
350 So. 2d 1 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1977)