STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN TRIMEL, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a discharge order based on speedy trial grounds, holding that a defendant's prior waiver of speedy trial rights carries over to a refiled information after nolle prosequi, and the applicable standard is constitutional reasonableness rather than the strict 90-day rule.
A defendant's waiver of speedy trial rights under a nolle prossed information carries over and remains effective under a refiled information, making the constitutional reasonableness standard applicable rather than the strict statutory time periods.
[1] A defendant's waiver of speedy trial rights under a nolle prossed information carries over and remains effective under a subsequently refiled information.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe state appealed from an order discharging the defendant on speedy trial grounds. The trial court had mistakenly believed that a defendant must be b…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
HURLEY, Judge.
The state appeals from an order granting defendant’s motion for discharge on speedy trial grounds. The trial court’s order was based on the mistaken impression that a defendant must be brought to trial within 90 days of the refiling of an information following a nolle prosequi. Defendant, however, waived his speedy trial rights in the initial prosecution and, as this court has previously held, a defendant’s waiver of speedy trial rights under a nolle prossed information carries over and is effective under the refiled information. State v. Luck, 336 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Clark v. State, 318 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).
The prior waiver being applicable, the stringent time periods under Rule 3.191, Fla.R.Crim.P., give way to broader constitutional guidelines and the operative question becomes whether defendant was brought to trial within a reasonable period of time. State ex rel. Butler v. Cullen, 253 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 1971); State v. Kurtz, 354 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 360 So. 2d 1249 (Fla. 1978). In answering this question, the trial court should consider the criteria set out in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972), specifically, length of delay, reason for the delay, defendant’s assertion of his right, and prejudice to the defendant.
The order is therefore reversed and the cause is remanded for a determination as to whether defendant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial has been impaired.
Reversed and remanded.
MOORE and BERANEK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ryder, 449 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…Cf State v. Corlew, 382 So. 2d [*399] 787 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (waiver of speedy trial applicable where state files amended information charging a crime arising out of same criminal episode that formed basis of original information); State v. Trimel, 387 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (waiver of speedy trial applies where state refiles information after nolle prosequi). REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT HEREWITH. GRIMES, A.C.J., concurs specially. SCHOONOVER, J., dissents with opinion.…
-
State v. Condon, 444 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…ndant has by obtaining a continuance waived his speedy trial rights under Rule 3.191, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the information is nolle prossed, the waiver carries over and is effective under the refiled information. State v. Trimel, 387 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); State v. Luck, 336 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Clark v. State, 318 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). Accord Stevens v. State, 383 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The speedy trial rule is subsequently brought back into play on…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1972)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Isaac Don Butler & Gerald Nickles v. Honorable Ralph O. Cullen, 253 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 1971)
- State v. Kurtz, 354 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Clark v. State, 318 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- State v. Luck, 336 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)