K. K., A CHILD, 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.
The trial court did not err in allowing the state to reopen its case after resting and after the defense moved for a judgment of acquittal to cure a defect.
The state rested its case, and the defense moved for a judgment of acquittal. The trial court allowed the state to reopen its case to cure a defect po…
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 Reopening A Case cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
The issue in this case is whether the trial court committed reversible error by allowing the state, after it had rested and the defense had moved for a judgment of acquittal, to reopen its ease to cure the defect pointed out in the defense motion.
On appeal, the defendant relies on the opinion of Burton v. State, 596 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), which found double jeopardy in a case wherein the state’s motion to reopen followed the trial court’s pronouncement that the defendant therein was not guilty. That is not what occurred in the instant case.
The First District Court of Appeal has held in several eases that allowing the state to reopen its ease is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. See, e.g., Fitzhugh v. State, 698 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Jones v. State, 392 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Dees v. State, 357 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Over 100 years ago the Florida Supreme Court held that reopening a ease for additional testimony is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Hoey v. Fletcher, 39 Fla. 325, 22 So. 716 (1897). It has reiterated that view in more recent eases. See, e.g., Stewart v. State, 420 So. 2d 862 (Fla.1982), cert denied, 460 U.S. 1103, 103 S.Ct. 1802, 76 L.Ed.2d 366 (1983); Pitts v. State, 185 So. 2d 164 (Fla.1966).
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., coneur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (23 total)
-
McMILLAN v. State, 832 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…1989). Thus, McMillan’s argument that the trial court abused its discretion in allowing the state to reopen its case is rendered moot. Even if it were not moot, this court has previously rejected the exact argument made by McMillan in K.K. v. State, 717 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). Likewise, McMillan’s remaining arguments must fall because the foundation upon which they were constructed has proven faulty. Because we find that the information sufficiently charged armed robbery with a firearm, McMillan’s ar…
-
Lyles v. State, 742 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…rt did not make a finding as to whether Lyles had violated the terms of his probation. Without such a pronouncement, we are satisfied that jeopardy did not attach and the further proceedings did not place Lyles in double jeopardy. See K.K. v. State, 717 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). Lyles contends that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing additional proceedings after the State rested and Lyles’ attorney pointed out the deficiency in the State’s proof. As support for this argument, Lyles cites…
-
Gregory v. State, 937 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…98); Smith v. State, 424 So. 2d 726 (Fla.1982); Brozey v. State, 911 So. 2d 867, 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Cartegena v. State, 909 So. 2d 414, 415 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Upshaw v. State, 871 So. 2d 1015, 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (quoting Arthur v. State, 717 So. 2d 193, 194 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)); Garramone v. State, 636 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Simon v. State, 589 So. 2d 381, 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Deveaugh v. State, 575 So. 2d 1373, 1374 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Cooper v. State, 573 So. 2d 74, 76 (Fla. 4th DC…
Previewing 3 of 23 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Stewart v. State, 420 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 1982)
- Stewart v. Florida, 460 U.S. 1103 (U.S. 1983)
- Fitzhugh v. State, 698 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Randoil Pitts, Jr. v. State, 185 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 1966)
- Dees v. State, 357 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- Jones v. State, 392 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Hoey v. Duncan U. Fletcher and John Wurts, 39 Fla. 325 (Fla. 1897)
- Burton v. State, 596 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)