THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
PAUL JAMES FERRANTE, A/K/A PAUL SPROTT, APPELLEE
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 court held that the State was entitled to an additional grace period under the speedy trial rules, and the earlier motion for discharge was correctly denied.
The trial court granted the defendant's motion for discharge, finding a violation of the speedy trial rule. The State appealed, arguing it was entitle…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Speedy Trial Right cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State appeals orders granting defendant’s motion for discharge. We reverse.
The trial judge granted defendant’s motion for discharge on the ground that the defendant had not been brought to trial within ninety days of the denial of defendant’s first motion for discharge. The State correctly contends, and defendant does not dispute, that under State v. Veliz, 524 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), the grace period of Rule 3.191(i)(4), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure (1989),* ap plied and permitted the State fifteen additional days after the filing of the motion for discharge to bring the defendant to trial.
While conceding that point, the defense contends that the trial court erred by failing to grant an earlier motion for discharge and thus the trial court orders should be affirmed on alternative grounds. On the facts here presented we conclude that the earlier motion was correctly denied. See Hopkins v. Barad, 380 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 3d 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).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Eufemia Veliz, 524 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Hopkins v. Barad, 380 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- In re Amendment TO Fla. Rule OF Crim. Procedure 3.191 (Speedy Trial), 542 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 1989)