RANDY CHAVIANO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 court held that a new trial is required when a trial transcript cannot be reconstructed and the defendant shows specific prejudice.
The appellant was convicted of second-degree murder and possession of drugs with intent to sell. The court reporter could not produce a transcript of …
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 Reconstruction Of Trial Record cases and more on FLexlaw
CONFESSION OF ERROR
Appellant Randy Chaviano (“Chaviano”) appeals from his conviction and sentence for second degree murder and possession of drugs with intent to sell. We vacate the judgment and sentence under review, and remand the case to the trial court to conduct a new trial.
In 2009, after an eight-day trial, Chavi-ano was convicted of second degree murder and possession of drugs with intent to sell. However, with the exception of a suppression hearing, the court reporter was unable to produce a transcript of the eight-day trial for use in Chaviano’s appeal. After this Court relinquished jurisdiction to the trial court to allow for reconstruction of the record pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(4), the trial court entered an order finding that based on the matters raised in the respective pleadings, the complexity of the trial, and the number of significant matters in dispute, the transcript in this case cannot be reconstructed.
Because the parties have been unable to reconstruct the trial transcript, and Chavi-ano has shown specific prejudice, see Jones v. State, 923 So.2d 486, 489 (Fla.2006); cf. Lewis v. State, 992 So.2d 421, 423 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), the State concedes that his conviction and sentence should be reversed *1292and the case remanded for a new trial. See N.B. v. State, 48 So.3d 1084 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); A.B. v. State, 816 So.2d 1269 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). We agree. Accordingly, we vacate Chaviano’s judgment and sentence and remand the case for a new trial.
REVERSED and REMANDED for new trial.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Cedrick Jones v. State, 923 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 2006)
- A.B. v. State, 816 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Lewis v. State, 992 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)