STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
THOMAS LEE SHARPE, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2002-02-27
No. 4D01-1344
STONE, STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
807 So. 2d 818 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Rubin v. State, 390 So. 2d 322 (Fla.1980)(holding that amended information may only “relate back” where the original information was timely filed); State v. Adjmi, 170 So. 2d 340, 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)(holding that “[subsequent] in-formations will not be subject to the statute of limitations when they are shown to be connected with and in continuation of a prosecution timely begun”),

STONE, STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Federico Labrador v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
    …-filed informations ‘will not be subject to the statute of limitations when they are shown to be connected with and in continuation of a prosecution timely begun.’ ”) (quoting State v. Adjmi, 170 So. 2d 340, 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)); State v. Sharpe, 807 So. 2d 818, 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)(affirming the trial court’s order based on the Rubin and Adjmi precedent that an amended information shown to be connected with and a continuation of an original information will not be subject to the statute of limitations…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw