JEFFREY AKEEM STURRIDGE
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court abuses its discretion by allowing the State to amend the information to charge a new offense on the morning of trial while denying the defendant's motion for a continuance.
[1] A trial court abuses its discretion by permitting amendment of criminal charges on the morning of trial without granting a continuance when such amendment introduces new…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe State sought to amend its information to charge a new offense on the morning of trial. The circuit court granted the amendment over the defendant'…
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 Trial Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
JEFFREY AKEEM STURRIDGE, Appellant,
v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2025-0706 [April 15, 2026]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Lawrence Michael Mirman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562023CF002577BXXXXX.
Daniel Eisinger, Public Defender, Patrick Barfield Burke, Assistant Public Defender, and Logan Tanner Mohs, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lindsay Ayn Warner, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
ON CONFESSION OF ERROR
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appeals the circuit court's final judgment and sentence. Over the defendant's objection, the circuit court allowed the State to amend its information and charge the defendant with a new offense on the morning of trial. The circuit court subsequently denied the defendant's motion for a continuance. On the defendant's appeal from that denial, the State filed a confession of error, conceding the amendment prejudiced the defendant. We have reviewed the matter, and we accept the State's confession of error. Accordingly, we reverse the denial of the motion for continuance, vacate the defendant's conviction and sentence, and remand for a new trial on the charges of robbery with a firearm (Count 1) and accessory after the fact to robbery with a firearm (Count 2).
Reversed and remanded.
KUNTZ, C.J., LEVINE and SHAW, JJ., concur. * * *
Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.