WILLIAM L. DAVIS, APPELLANT,

v.

R. J. BROWN, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (16 total)

• Eligaah Ardalle Jacobs v. State, 396 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 1981)
  …rsue the interlocutory appeal. The additional extensions of time were effective because only the trial court, not the appellate court, may grant an extension of the speedy trial time period while an interlocutory appeal is pending. State v. Barnett, 366 So. 2d 411 (Fla.1978). The June 11, 1975, order of the trial court validly extended the time until a reasonable period after the appellate court filed its opinion. As we stated in State v. Jenkins, 389 So. 2d 971, 974 (Fla.1980), “[I]f the trial court grants…
• Muller v. State, 387 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
  …as never entered. In the absence of an order of extension entered by the trial court during the speedy trial period, we will not find that the time was extended, no matter how compelling or exceptional the circumstances may appear. State v. Barnett, 366 So. 2d 411 (Fla.1978); Stuart v. State, 360 So. 2d 406 (Fla.1978); State ex rel. Lee v. Harper, 372 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Mullin v. State, 307 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Pouncy v. State, 296 So. 2d 625 (Fla.3d DCA 1974).7 The State next urges t…
• State v. O. C. "Sonny" King, 372 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
  …e two-week period. A hearing on these motions was held on September 13. The state also sought rehearing on the ruling of May 25 requiring amendment of the information in case no. 77-8902. In seeking a rehearing, the state relied on State v. Barnett, 366 So. 2d 411 (Fla.1978). After considering Barnett, the trial court agreed that the other persons involved need not be named in the information in case no. 77-8902, but reaffirmed its requirement that the date of the offense be specified. The judge then asked t…