Stiles v. State

Florida Circuit Courts

Stiles v. State

36 Fla. Supp. 2d 39

CourtCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida

DecidedJuly 17, 1989

DocketCase No. 88-92AC10 (County Court Case No. 88-19461MM10)

StatusPublished

This text of 36 Fla. Supp. 2d 39 (Stiles v. State) 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

Stiles v. State, 36 Fla. Supp. 2d 39 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

RUSSELL E. SEAY, JR., Circuit Judge.

THIS IS an appeal on the issue of whether the trial court erred by denying appellant’s Motion for Discharge where appellant had not been brought to trial within fifty (50) days of the demand for speedy trial pursuant to Rule 3.191(a)(2)(4).

This court finds that the trial court erred in denying the Motion for Discharge.

In support of this finding, this court adopts the reasoning and holding found in State v Kilts, 24 Fla. Supp. 2d 119 (17th Cir. 1987), and State v Andino, 24 Fla. Supp. 2d 142 (11th Cir. 1987). It is,

ORDERED that this cause is remanded to the trial court for the entry of an appropriate order granting the Motion for Discharge.

DONE AND ORDERED in chambers, at Fort Lauderdale, Bro-ward County, Florida, this 17th day of July, 1989.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

RUSSELL E. SEAY, JR., Circuit Judge.

THIS IS an appeal on the issue of whether the trial court erred by denying appellant’s Motion for Discharge where appellant had not been brought to trial within fifty (50) days of the demand for speedy trial pursuant to Rule 3.191(a)(2)(4).

This court finds that the trial court erred in denying the Motion for Discharge.

In support of this finding, this court adopts the reasoning and holding found in State v Kilts, 24 Fla. Supp. 2d 119 (17th Cir. 1987), and State v Andino, 24 Fla. Supp. 2d 142 (11th Cir. 1987). It is,

ORDERED that this cause is remanded to the trial court for the entry of an appropriate order granting the Motion for Discharge.

DONE AND ORDERED in chambers, at Fort Lauderdale, Bro-ward County, Florida, this 17th day of July, 1989.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 Fla. Supp. 2d 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stiles-v-state-flacirct-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack