STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
SUBI TITUS, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida appellate court quashed trial court's order disclosing confidential informant identity because the court granted disclosure without considering sworn allegations supporting defendant's entrapment defense.
A trial court must consider sworn allegations of a legally cognizable defense before ordering disclosure of a confidential informant's identity.
[1] A trial court must consider sworn allegations supporting a specific and available defense before ordering disclosure of a confidential informant's identity, and should co…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“burden of showing that disclosure of the CI's identity is necessary to a specific and available defense”
Standard defendant must meet to obtain confidential informant disclosure
Defendant Subi Titus moved to disclose a confidential informant's identity, but did not file a supporting affidavit until one month after the trial co…
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 Certiorari Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
The State seeks certiorari relief following the trial court’s June 23, 2011 order granting defendant Subi Titus’s motion to disclose the identity of a confidential informant. Titus did not file an affidavit until July 27, 2011 — one month after the order issued. The trial court never considered sworn allegations. We, therefore, find that the trial court departed from the es*764sential requirements of the law when it granted disclosure without having sworn allegations of a legally cognizable defense before it. State v. Carter, 29 So.3d 1217, 1219 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). We make no determination of Titus’s entrapment defense, on the merits, as doing so would be premature.
We quash the trial court’s order mandating disclosure of the confidential informant’s identity. The court may make new findings based upon sworn allegations in which to determine whether the defendant has met his “burden of showing that disclosure of the Cl’s identity is necessary to a specific and available defense .... ” State v. Rivas, 25 So.3d 647, 651 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). If so, the court should then, “conduct an in camera hearing to determine if the Cl has anything relevant and helpful to say before ordering disclosure of the Cl’s identity.” Id.
Petition granted.
MAY, C.J., POLEN and CONNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Sharmark Powell, 140 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)…thout disclosure are insufficient. State v. Mashke, 577 So. 2d 610, 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Accordingly, in the absence of sworn allegations of a legally cognizable defense, a trial court is without authority to order disclosure. See State v. Titus, 70 So. 3d 763, 763-64 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (granting certiorari relief as the trial court never considered sworn allegations before granting defendant’s motion to disclose the identity of a confidential informant); State v. Davila, 570 So. 2d 1035, 1038 (Fla. 2d D…
-
State v. Yul Medina, 127 So. 3d 703 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…isclose the identity of a confidential informant. We grant the petition. We agree that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law when it declined to conduct an in camera hearing before it ordered the disclosure. State v. Titus, 70 So. 3d 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); State v. Rivas, 25 So. 3d 647, 650 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Thomas v. State, 28 So. 3d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Miller v. State, 729 So. 2d 417, 419-20 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); State v. Ayala, 713 So. 2d 1050, 1052 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); S…
-
State v. Henry (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- State v. Darion A. Carter, 29 So. 3d 1217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Roker v. State, 25 So. 3d 647 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- State v. Leonicio Rivas and Juan Rodriguez-Abrea, 25 So. 3d 647 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- Dava E. McCORD v. State, 29 So. 3d 1217 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)