IN RE RULE 3.160(A), FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
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.
The Florida Supreme Court granted an emergency petition to amend Rule 3.160(a) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure to permit arraignments in felony and misdemeanor cases to be conducted either in person or by audiovisual device at the court's discretion, finding that due process does not require physical courtroom presence when the defendant and judge can see each other through mechanical means.
The Court granted the petition and amended Rule 3.160(a) to permit arraignments in both felony and misdemeanor cases to be conducted either personally or by audiovisual device in the discretion of the court. The Court held that due process does not require the personal presence of a defendant in a courtroom when, through audiovisual means, he can see the judge and the judge can see him.
[1] Audiovisual arraignments are permissible for felony and misdemeanor cases when technology permits, at the discretion of the court.
[2] Audiovisual arraignments can enhance court efficiency by saving time and expense, providing safety, and minimizing the need for additional court personnel.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We are satisfied that due process does not require the personal presence of a defendant in a courtroom before a judge when, through mechanical means, he can see the judge and the judge can see him.”
Establishes the core holding that audiovisual arraignments comply with constitutional due process requirements
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe chief judges of the 18th, 9th, and 11th Circuits requested an emergency amendment to Rule 3.160(a) to allow felony and misdemeanor arraignments vi…
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.
PER CURIAM.
We have been presented an emergency request by the chief judge of the 18th Circuit, joined in by the chief judges of the 9th and 11th Circuits, to amend rule 3.160(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, to permit all felony as well as misdemeanor arraignments to be done either personally in open court or by audiovisual device at the discretion of the court. Because some circuits are doing this by administrative order and because the procedure affects many arraignments, we have accepted the petition as an emergency.
After reviewing the application, the Court finds that it should be granted. Present rule 3.130 permits first appearances “in person or by audio device.” When the technology is available, audiovisual arraignments, as well as appearances, can save time and expense, provide safety, minimize the need for additional court personnel, and still fully and accurately protect defendants’ rights.
The word “arraign” means to call a prisoner to the bar of the court to answer the matters charged upon him in an indictment Ex Parte Jeffcoat, 109 Fla. 207, 146 So. 827 (1933). The purpose of an arraignment is to identify the accused and give him an opportunity to plead and to inform him of the nature of the accusation against him. Ex Parte Livingston, 116 Fla. 640, 156 So. 612 (1934); Moore v. State, 44 Fla. 146, 32 So. 795 (1902). We are satisfied that due process does not require the personal presence of a defendant in a courtroom before a judge when, through mechanical means, he can see the judge and the judge can see him.
As the population grows, with the attendant multiple places of confinement and courthouses, the use of audiovisual transmissions can enhance the efficiency of the courts. Care must be taken to fully protect all the constitutional rights of an accused. This rule change, however, does not adversely affect any such right.
Accordingly, we grant the petition. Rule 3.160(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, is amended to read:
(a) Nature of Arraignment. The arraignment shall be conducted in open court personally-, — or—⅛—misdemeanor cases, either personally or by audiovisual device in the discretion of the court and shall consist of the clerk or prosecuting attorney reading the indictment or information upon which the defendant will be tried to the defendant or stating orally to him the substances of the charge or charges and calling upon him to plead thereto. Such reading or statement as to the charge or charges may be waived by the defendant. If the defendant is represented by counsel, his counsel may file a written plea of not guilty at or before arraignment and thereupon arraignment shall be deemed waived.
This amendment will be effective immediately upon the filing of this opinion.
It is so ordered.
NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ALLOWED.
EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, MCDONALD, SHAW, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 606 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 1992)…designated individuals who may advise the defendant of the pending charges. Apparently, the 1988 amendment to rule 3.160(a) inadvertently eliminated the judge from the arraignment procedure. In re Rule 3.160(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 528 So. 2d 1179, 1180 (Fla.1988). The prior amendment did include the judge. The Florida Bar Re: Amendment to Rules — Criminal Procedure, 462 So. 2d 386 (Fla.1984). While the language of rule [*260] 3.160(a) as presently set out in the Florida Bar pamphlet, Florida…
-
Harrell v. State, 689 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…h attendant multiple places of confinement and courthouses, the use of audiovisual transmissions can enhance the efficiency of the courts,” so long as the rights of the accused are protected. In re Rule 3.160(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 528 So. 2d 1179 (Fla.1988). We conclude that use of satellite testimony enhances the efficiency of our legal system. IV. PUBLIC POLICY CONSIDERATIONS Actual face-to-face confrontation is not an absolute right. Exceptions to the right are permissible where to do s…
-
Thomas v. State, 574 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…e method employed here “fatally and fundamentally flawed,” I have no alternative but to concur.2 However, I believe the Supreme Court of Florida may have tacitly agreed with me when it adopted In re Rule 3.160(a) Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 528 So. 2d 1179 (Fla.1988). See also [*324] State v. Porter, 755 S.W. 2d 3 (Mo.App.1988). . Indeed, for aught we know, he may have implemented it. . I note that the trial judge conducted this sentencing hearing prior to the publication of Jacobs.…
Authorities Cited
- Ex Parte: Elvin E. Jeffcoat, 109 Fla. 207 (Fla. 1933)
- Ex Parte: Archibald Livingston, 116 Fla. 640 (Fla. 1934)
- Moore v. State, 44 Fla. 146 (Fla. 1902)