EVA RAMIREZ, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• State v. Mansuel Lee Union, 469 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
  …onth prearrest delay and the seventeen-month delay from the filing of the information until the hearing was presumptively prejudicial. However, Union has failed to show that he has suffered actual prejudice because of the delay. See Barber v. State, 438 So. 2d 976, 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), petition for review denied, 447 So. 2d 885 (Fla.1984); State v. Ochran, 429 So. 2d 77 [*842] (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The unsworn motion to dismiss did not allege why actual prejudice resulted, and the trial judge did not make a…
• State v. Leroney Hills, 467 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
  …a. 1st DCA 1982). In order to show prejudice, general allegations that the evidence has been lost are insufficient. The accused must also “offer some explanation as to how [the lost evidence] would have been favorable and material.” Barber v. State, 438 So. 2d 976, 978, n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), rev. denied, 447 So. 2d 885 (Fla.1984) (citations omitted). See also Marrero v. State, 428 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); State v. Newman, 367 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). The appel-lee in the instant case never off…
• State v. Isaiah Grady, 657 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
  …y earlier. Even where the delay is caused by nothing more than administrative oversight by the state, the defendant must prove that the delay caused actual prejudice before the state may be required to explain or justify the delay. Barber v. State, 438 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 447 So. 2d 885 (Fla.1984). Here, there was no evidence that the delay was intentionally caused by the state to gain a tactical advantage. Moreover, the state has no duty to press charges against a defendant once pr…

Authorities Cited

• Clark v. State, 363 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1978)
• State v. Melendez, 244 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 1971)