CONNIE GRINER, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Hahn v. State, 626 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
  …l has been filed, and that Hahn could have found the witnesses through diligent search. Contrary to the state’s assertions, the invocation of the right to speedy trial does not negate the state’s continuing discovery obligation. See State v. Frank, 573 So. 2d 1070, 1071 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (holding that a defendant cannot be forced to choose between the right to have discovery and an adequate time to use it in preparing for trial, and the right to speedy trial). Thus, we hold that in accordance with Richardso…
• Dechaine v. State, 751 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
  …Id. at 721, n. 7. The state suggests that pre-1980 opinions, such as Tucker, are no longer applicable, due to subsequent modification of the speedy trial rule; however, we can discern no basis for such a conclusion. We note that in State v. Frank, 573 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), this court cited Tucker and the language in footnote seven in affirming the lower court’s grant of a discharge for violation of the speedy trial rule. Id. at 1071. Rule 3.140(m), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, states that…

Authorities Cited

• Bartelmy Harris v. State, 544 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)