WALLACE W. JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Wallace Jones appealed his conviction and sentence for attempted murder and grand theft, arguing he was improperly denied discharge on speedy trial grounds. The appellate court reversed, holding that because Jones was incarcerated by the state and the state had knowledge of his whereabouts, his failure to appear at a pretrial hearing did not constitute a waiver of his speedy trial rights.
A defendant incarcerated by the state does not waive speedy trial rights through non-appearance at pretrial proceedings. The state bears the burden of producing an incarcerated defendant when it has knowledge of the defendant's whereabouts. Jones' conviction and sentence were reversed and set aside with directions for discharge.
[1] A defendant incarcerated in another county within the state is not unavailable such that his speedy trial rights are waived if the state has knowledge of his incarceratio…
[2] The state bears the burden of producing a defendant incarcerated within its jurisdiction.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“A defendant incarcerated by the state is not unavailable such that his speedy trial rights are waived.”
Establishes the core legal principle that state incarceration does not waive speedy trial rights.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJones was taken into custody on October 22, 1988. The 175-day speedy trial period expired in April 1989. Jones filed a motion to discharge on July 27,…
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 Attempted Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
BARFIELD, Judge.
Jones appeals his conviction and sentence for attempted murder and grand theft. Because Jones was improperly denied discharge on the grounds of speedy trial, we reverse his convictions and direct that he be discharged.
Under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.191 a person charged with a felony who is not brought to trial within 175 days is entitled to seek discharge on the grounds of the state’s failure to afford him a speedy trial. Jones was first taken into custody on October 22, 1988. In April 1989 the 175-day period expired. The motion to discharge was filed July 27, 1989, denied July 28 without any appearance by defense counsel, reheard and denied again on August 7. Trial did not commence until October 11, 1989. The basis of the denial of discharge was Jones’ failure to appear and resultant waiver of speedy trial on the basis of non-availability with regard to a January 26, 1989 pre-trial hearing. Jones did not appear because he was incarcerated in another county on other charges, and this fact had been made known to the court and the prosecutor. A defendant incarcerated by the state is not unavailable such that his speedy trial rights are waived. Tirado v. Reese, 478 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Robbins v. State, 453 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); State v. Dukes, 443 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). An exception to this general rule exists when the defendant is incarcerated in another county within the state, but no one on behalf of the state knows of his incarceration. Pilgrim v. Swanson, 558 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); State v. Rasul, 468 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Garnett v. State, 457 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) review denied 464 So. 2d 554 (Fla.1985). The state has sufficient notice of an accused’s presence in another county when so advised. Walker v. State, 492 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); State v. Rasul. If the defendant is in custody in the same county on other charges the state is charged with constructive knowledge of his whereabouts. Woods v. State, 514 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Barron v. State, 509 So. 2d 1158 (Fla.1987).
In the instant case the state clearly knew of Jones’ whereabouts. When a defendant is incarcerated within the jurisdiction of the State of Florida, the state bears the burden of producing him. Pilgrim v. Swanson; Carter v. State, 509 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Robbins v. State; Tirado v. Reese; Gaskins v. State, 433 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
Jones’ conviction and sentence are reversed and set aside, and the case is remanded to the trial court with directions that he be discharged.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
SMITH and WOLF, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Gantt, 688 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…respond to a charge he did not know about. Because the defendant was in the State’s control for the entire period in question, the State should have noticed the defendant in jail and arranged to have him present for arraignment. See Jones v. State, 573 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Tirado v. Reese, 478 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); V.C. v. Ferguson, 422 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). Granting the State more time to bring the defendant to trial would disembowel the speedy trial rule. See State v. Agee, 62…
-
Trainer v. Honorable Virginia Gay Broome, 666 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…ses on the Palm Beach County charges on June 20, 1992. The mere fact that Trainer was incar [*1021] cerated in Broward County did not render him unavailable to the state and did not prevent him from asserting his speedy trial rights. Jones v. State, 573 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); State v. Dukes, 443 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). The Palm Beach County authorities obviously had knowledge of Trainer’s whereabouts and had the burden of producing him for trial. Pilgrim v. Swanson, 558 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DC…
-
Edwards v. Honorable Diana M. Allen, 603 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…contest this allegation. The petitioner argues that in a situation such as this, where the charging county knows that a defendant is incarcerated in another county, the defendant is not unavailable for purposes of speedy trial. See Jones v. State, 573 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Tirado v. Reese, 478 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Robbins v. State, 453 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). He argues that speedy trial began to run on the date the information was filed because the charging county knew of his inca…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- Robbins v. State, 453 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- State v. Natal Rasul, 468 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Tirado v. Reese, 478 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Walker v. State, 492 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Carter v. State, 509 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- State v. Dukes, 443 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- Errol Garnett v. State, 457 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Pilgrim v. Honorable Maynard F. Swanson, Jr., 558 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Henry v. Barron and Todd C. Spitzer, 509 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Woods v. State, 514 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)