IN RE AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.191 (SPEEDY TRIAL)

Fla. | 1989-05-04
No. 73741
EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD and GRIMES, JJ., concur., KOGAN, J., dissents with an opinion, in which SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur.
542 So. 2d 1330 Florida Supreme Court (1989) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court granted a petition by state attorneys to amend Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 to eliminate the automatic discharge remedy in misdemeanor speedy trial cases and treat misdemeanor and felony cases uniformly under the same dismissal procedures.


Holding

The Court granted the petition and adopted the amended Rule 3.191, establishing uniform procedures for dismissal in both misdemeanor and felony cases by repealing the automatic discharge remedy in misdemeanor cases and requiring courts to hold hearings and make findings before any discharge is ordered.


Headnotes

[1] A proposed amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191, which would repeal the remedy of automatic discharge in misdemeanor cases for speedy trial violations, i…

[2] There is no legal basis to differentiate between misdemeanor and felony cases regarding the remedy for failure to abide by speedy trial rules.

Previewing 2 of 6 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

Key Quotes

“We agree with the state attorneys that there is no reason to treat misdemeanor cases in a manner different from felony cases.”

The Court's rationale for granting the amendment and eliminating differential treatment of misdemeanor and felony speedy trial cases.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

State attorneys petitioned the Florida Supreme Court to amend Rule 3.191 regarding the speedy trial remedy. The proposed amendment would eliminate the…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The state attorneys of Florida petition this Court to consider a proposed amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.130. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. The proposed rule change provides similar procedures for dismissal for failure to abide by the speedy trial rule in both misdemeanor and felony cases. The intended effect of the amendment is to repeal the remedy of automatic discharge in misdemeanor cases. We agree with the state attorneys that there is no reason to treat misdemeanor cases in a manner different from felony cases. Therefore, we grant the petition and hereby adopt rule 3.191 as amended.

Appended to this opinion is the amended Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191. Deletions are indicated by use of struck-through type and new language is indicated by underscoring. All rules and statutes in conflict with the following rule are hereby superseded as of the effective date of these rules. These amendments shall become effective July 1, 1989, at 12:01 a.m.

It is so ordered.

EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD and GRIMES, JJ., concur. KOGAN, J., dissents with an opinion, in which SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur. RULE 3.191. Speedy Trial

(i)Remedy for Failure to Try Defendant within the Specified Time.

(1) No remedy shall be granted to any defendant under this Rule until the court shall have made the required inquiry under section (d)(3).

(2) In the case of a defendant charged with a misdemeanor, the defendant shall, upon motion timely made with the court at the expiration of the prescribed time period,-be forever discharged from the crime?

(2) (3) In the case of a defendant charged with a felony. The defendant may, at any time after the expiration of the prescribed time period, file a motion for discharge.

(3) (4) No later than 5 days from the date of the filing of a motion for discharge, the court shall hold a hearing on the motion, and unless the court finds that one of the reasons set forth in section (d)(3) existe, shall order that the defendant be brought to trial within 10 days. If the defendant is not brought to trial within the 10 day period through no fault of the defendant, the defendant shall be forever discharged from the crime.

Dissent
KOGAN, Justice,

KOGAN, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent. I agree with the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee of The Florida Bar in strongly opposing the state attorneys’ petition to amend rule 3.191.

The proposal before us is an example of consistency for the sake of consistency, with no reason of substantive value supporting the change. On the contrary, there is substantial reason to reject the proposed change.

At the time the “window” provision was proposed for felony cases, it was felt there were certain cases in which the potential damage to societal interests was serious enough to outweigh the defendant’s rights to a technical dismissal for failure to grant a speedy trial. No such necessity exists in misdemeanor cases. Although some misdemeanor cases are serious in nature, they do not rise to a level that the societal harm overrides the necessity for a strict speedy trial rule.

Therefore, I would reject the proposed change in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191.

SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Livingston v. State, 564 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
    …ffect in 1988, provides that a defendant shall be discharged on a timely motion if he is not brought to trial within 90 days of his arrest on a misdemeanor charge. But see, In re Amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure, 3.191 (Speedy Trial), 542 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 1989). In Sharif v. State, 436 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), the Fourth District made the following observations concerning the utility of Rule 3.191(b)(2): Prior to the adoption of Rule 3.191(b)(2), informations or indictments charging a f…
  • Massey v. Hon. Gayle Graziano, 564 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
    …es involved in this cause. WRIT GRANTED. HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(i)(4) is now renumbered rule 3.191(i)(3) effective July 1, 1989. See In re Amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191, 542 So. 2d 1330 (Fla.1989).…
  • State v. Ferrante, 561 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
    …d DCA 1980). We therefore reverse the orders of discharge and remand for further proceedings. * Renumbered as Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(i)(3) (1990). See In re Amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 (Speedy Trial), 542 So. 2d 1330 (Fla.1989).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw