L.J., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We reject L.J.’s contention that he is entitled to discharge upon speedy trial grounds pursuant to Rule 8.180(c), Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure. The trial court found, and we agree, that the witness’s unavailability was not attributable to the state. See State v. Daniels, 413 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Dedmon v. State, 400 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). L.J.’s reliance on In the Interest of B.L.G., 414 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), is misplaced. In that case no motion for an extension of time was made by the state or granted by the trial court. In the case sub judice a motion for continuance was timely made, granted by the trial court and the requisite findings were made of record. See M.M. v. State, 407 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Lancione, 430 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…tance as the [*972] court’s order was functionally equivalent to such an extension. While not specifically denominated as an order to extend the speedy trial requirement, it nevertheless includes the findings required by the rule. See L.J. v. State, 423 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We think it implicitly extended the time for speedy trial, and the appel-lee should not be permitted to avail herself of a technical deficiency in its form, particularly since she was a party to the stipulation and the hearing wa…
Authorities Cited
- Dedmon v. State, 400 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- M. M. v. State, 407 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- State v. Daniels, 413 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- In the Interest of B. L. G., 414 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)