STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT L. MASSEY, 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 court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss was deficient because it failed to demonstrate that the undisputed facts did not establish a prima facie case.
Police executed a search warrant and found the defendant in bed with illegal substances within his reach. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss, all…
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 Possession Of Cannabis cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, J.
The State of Florida appeals the dismissal of its information against Robert L. Massey based on his Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4) motion. Our de novo review compels us to reverse. See, e.g., Bell v. State, 835 So. 2d 392 (Fla.2d DCA 2003).
The State charged Massey by information with possession of cocaine, possession of twenty grams or less of cannabis and possession of drug paraphernalia when the police entered a residence pursuant to a search warrant and saw him lying in bed. The police found the illegal substances within Massey’s reach on an adjoining table and on the floor. Massey’s motion merely requested dismissal pursuant to rule 3.190(c)(4) and recited the same facts alleged in the charging affidavit. The State also alleged that Massey had been watching television when the drugs were seized and that in the closet of the same room there was paperwork connected to his probation, thereby implying that he had a substantial connection to the room in which he was found.
A defendant has the initial burden when filing a rule 3.190(c)(4) motion to allege that the material facts are undisputed and demonstrate that the undisputed facts do not establish a prima facie case. E.g., Ellis v. State, 346 So. 2d 1044, 1045-46 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 352 So. 2d 175 (Fla.1977). Massey failed to carry that burden as he has not demonstrated that the undisputed facts failed to establish a prima facie case.
Accordingly, Massey’s motion was deficient. See, e.g., State v. Gutierrez, 649 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); State v. Huggins, 368 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
The order dismissing the information is vacated and we remand for further proceedings.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Shuler, 988 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…ringly. Miller, 971 So. 2d at 952; Williams, 873 So. 2d at 604. Based on the applicable de novo standard of review, see Galston v. State, 943 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); State v. James, 928 So. 2d 1269, 1270 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); State v. Massey, 873 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), we have thoroughly analyzed the undisputed facts arising from the State’s evidence, which includes the various meetings between Shuler and the man with whom he is accused of conspiring to sell drugs; the transcripts of legally i…
-
Galston v. State, 943 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…ndary lines of a way or place if any part of that way or place is open to public use for purposes of vehicular traffic. A de novo standard applies for reviewing the denial of a motion to dismiss [*971] pursuant to Rule 3.190(c)(4). State v. Massey, 873 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). That rule allows the defendant to file a motion to dismiss if “[tjhere are no material disputed facts and the undisputed facts do not establish a prima facie case of guilt against the defendant.” The State filed a demurrer stat…
Authorities Cited
- Ellis v. State, 346 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Gralen A. Bell v. State, 835 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- State v. Huggins, 368 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
- State v. Gutierrez, 649 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)