THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DOROTHY SHERRI BROOKS AND ANGIE PHIFFER, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Dismiss Indictment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial judge dismissed a grand jury indictment as against the present appellees on the ground that the evidence presented at a bond hearing demonstrated that “[tjhere was no probable cause to support [their] arrest.” As one of the defendants has forthrightly conceded by confessing error in this court, this order was entirely erroneous. Except for appropriately ruling on a sworn motion to dismiss under Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.190(c)(4), which was not filed in this case, a trial court may not dismiss a duly returned indictment or information on the basis of a finding that the evidence is insufficient to support it. State v. Schroeder, 112 So. 2d 257, 261 (Fla. 1959); State v. Umbrecht, 371 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); State v. Antel, 333 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), cert. denied, 344 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 1977). Accordingly, the order under review is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to reinstate the indictment.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Zeb Adderly, 411 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…prima facie case of guilt against the defendant must conform to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4) requiring that the facts be specifically alleged and the motion sworn to. See State v. Davis, 243 So. 2d 587 (Fla.1971); State v. Brooks, 388 So. 2d 1291 (Fla.3d DCA 1980). Having determined that Adderly’s motion could have been made only pursuant to Rule 3.190(c)(4), supra, we hold that the trial court erred in granting the motion to dismiss because, (1) the motion lacked specific factual allegatio…
-
State v. Ochoa, 576 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…DCA 1989). The court may not dismiss an information on the basis of a finding that the evidence is insufficient to support it, in the absence of a sworn motion to dismiss under Rule 3.190(c)(4), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. State v. Brooks, 388 So. 2d 1291, 1292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The order under review is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith. . In the trial court the State also relied on subsection 90.803(23), Florida Statutes (1989). On this appeal the St…
-
State v. E.T., 560 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…3 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), because “[a]n illegal arrest, without more, has never been viewed as a bar to subsequent prosecution nor as defense to a valid charge,” State v. Tillman, 402 So. 2d 19, 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); accord State v. Brooks, 388 So. 2d 1291, 1292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); State v. Umbrecht, 371 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); and that “the power of a court to try a person for crime is not impaired by the fact that he ha[s] been brought within the court’s jurisdiction by reason of ‘forcible…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Schroeder, 112 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1959)
- State v. Antel, 333 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)
- State v. Umbrecht, 371 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)