OCALA STAR BANNER CORPORATION, ETC., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, AND JOHN ALAN JONES, RESPONDENTS
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 Florida appellate court dismissed a petition for certiorari seeking to quash a subpoena requiring a newspaper reporter to testify about information obtained during an interview with a criminal defendant. The court found the petition moot because the subpoena had been withdrawn before the appeal was decided.
The petition for certiorari is denied as moot because the subpoena is no longer in effect and there can be no miscarriage of justice; the court declines to address the merits of the privilege claim.
[1] A petition for writ of certiorari will be denied as moot when the subpoena at issue has been withdrawn.
[2] Discretionary review by certiorari is appropriate only when there is a departure from the essential requirements of law causing a miscarriage of justice.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Discretionary review by certiorari should be afforded only where there is a departure from the essential requirements of law causing miscarriage of justice, and, in this case, there can be no miscarriage of justice since the subpoena in question is no longer in effect.”
Establishes the court's rationale for dismissing the petition as moot—no miscarriage of justice is possible when the subpoena has been withdrawn.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceChristopher Lloyd, a reporter for the Ocala Star Banner, was subpoenaed to testify concerning information obtained during an interview with John Alan …
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 Qualified Privilege cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, J.
The Ocala Star Banner and one of its reporters, Christopher Lloyd, seek certiorari review of a circuit court order denying their motion to quash a subpoena directing Lloyd to testify concerning information obtained during an interview with respondent, John Alan Jones, a defendant in a criminal case. Petitioners asserted the journalist qualified privilege under section 90.5015, Florida Statute.1
Jones has filed a suggestion of mootness, stating that the subpoena has been withdrawn and Lloyd is no longer compelled to give testimony. Because the subpoena has been withdrawn, the petition for writ of certiorari is denied as moot. Discretionary review by certiorari should be afforded only where there is a departure from the essential requirements of law causing miscarriage of justice, and, in this case, there can be no miscarriage of justice since the subpoena in question is no longer in effect. See Haines City Community Development v. Heggs, 658 So. 2d 523 (Fla.1995). See also Hawaiian Inn of Daytona Beach, Inc. v. Snead Construction Corp., 393 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (certiorari is not a writ of expediency). The petition for writ of certiorari is denied since the issue is moot, thus, we do not discuss the merits of the petition.
PETITION DENIED AS MOOT.
GRIFFIN, C. J., and W. SHARP, J., concur. . § 90.5015(2), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1998):
PRIVILEGE. — A professional journalist has a qualified privilege not to be a witness concerning, and not to disclose the information, including the identity of any source, that the professional journalist has obtained while actively gathering news. This privilege applies only to information or eyewitness observations obtained within the normal scope of employment and does not apply to physical evidence, eyewitness observations, or visual or audio recording of crimes. A party seeking to overcome this privilege must make a clear and specific showing that:
(a) The information is relevant and material to unresolved issues that have been raised in the proceeding for which the information is sought:
(b) The information cannot be obtained from alternative sources; and
(c) A compelling interest exists for requiring disclosure of the information.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't OF Child. & Families v. E.G., 939 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…jurisdiction in this matter, we now turn to the merits. “Discretionary review by cer-tiorari should be afforded only where there is a departure from the essential requirements of law causing miscarriage of justice.” Ocala Star Banner Corp. v. State, 721 So. 2d 838, 838-839 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). In this case, the Department sought to shelter K.S.G. and E.T.G. based upon substantial evidence that their father was consistently abusing drugs and alcohol while at home supervising a four-year-old child and six-year-…
Authorities Cited
- Haines City Cmty. Dev. v. Leila Heggs, 658 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 1995)
- The Hawaiian INN OF Daytona Beach Inc. v. Snead Constr. Corp., 393 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)