Thompson v. State
763 So. 2d 1216, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 6400, 2000 WL 679740
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Thompson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 708 So. 2d 315 →
Opinion
The-appellant in this direct criminal appeal challenges his conviction. We reverse the conviction and remand this case for a new trial because the trial court conducted an inadequate hearing regarding the state’s discovery violation, see Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771 (Fla.1971), and we are unable to say on this record that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. Schopp, 653 So.2d 1016 (Fla.1995).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Thompson v. State, 763 So. 2d 1216, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 6400, 2000 WL 679740 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).
763 So. 2d 1216 (Thompson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Schopp
653 So. 2d 1016 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)
Richardson v. State
246 So. 2d 771 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1971)