T.P. v. State

656 So. 2d 951, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6590, 1995 WL 360695
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 19, 1995·No. No. 94-4274·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

T.P. appeals from an order finding him in violation of section 806.13, Florida Statutes (1993).

We reluctantly reverse for failure of the trial court to hold an adequate hearing pursuant to Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771 (Fla.1971), when the State disclosed for the first time at trial, an alleged confession by the Appellant.1 Although a Richardson violation is no longer per se reversible error, we are unable to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense was not procedurally prejudiced by the discovery violation. State v. Schopp, 653 So.2d 1016 (Fla.1995).

Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND for a new trial.

WEBSTER, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

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

T.P. v. State, 656 So. 2d 951, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6590, 1995 WL 360695 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

656 So. 2d 951 (T.P. 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)