JEROME J. FERRIER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 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.
Ferrier appealed the trial court's denial of his mandamus petition seeking discovery materials from the Public Defender's Office. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court erred by denying the petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing to resolve factual disputes about whether the Public Defender possessed the requested materials.
The trial court erred in denying the mandamus petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing. When there is a disputed factual issue regarding whether a governmental entity possesses requested public records, an evidentiary hearing is required to resolve the dispute before the mandamus petition can be properly denied.
[1] A writ of mandamus is improper where there is an unresolved factual dispute regarding the existence or possession of requested materials.
[2] A circuit court errs in denying a petition for writ of mandamus without conducting an evidentiary hearing when the respondent files an unsworn response contesting the exi…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“the issuance of a writ of mandamus would be improper where there was an unresolved factual dispute”
Establishes the trial court's reasoning for denying the petition
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFerrier filed a public records request with the Public Defender's Office, Second Judicial Circuit of Florida, seeking various discovery materials. The…
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 Public Records Request cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from the circuit court’s denial of Appellant’s petition for writ of mandamus compelling the Public Defender’s Office to comply with Appellant’s public records request seeking various discovery material. The Public Defender’s Office filed an unsworn response to the mandamus petition arguing that it did not possess some of the requested materials and that it had provided Appellant with copies of the requested materials that were in its possession. The trial court denied the petition, reasoning that the issuance of a writ of mandamus would be improper where there was an unresolved factual dispute.
We agree with Appellant that the circuit court erred in not conducting an evidentia-ry hearing on the contested issue of whether the Public Defender’s Officer had the requested materials in its possession. Clay County Educ. Ass’n v. Clay County Sch. Bd., 144 So.3d 708, 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (reversing the dismissal of a petition for writ of mandamus based on a response that the School Board had already turned over the documents, the documents did not exist in the formant requested, or the documents did not exist and remanding for an evidentiary hearing); Johanson v. State, 872 So.2d 387, 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (reversing the denial of a petition for writ of mandamus based on an unsworn response filed by the State that it did not possess the records requested and remanding for an evidentiary hearing, including an in camera inspection of the state attorney’s file, to determine who possessed the required records). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial and remand for an evidentiary hearing. We affirm all other issues raised on appeal without further discussion. .
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
LEWIS, ROWE, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Holley v. Bradford Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 171 So. 3d 805 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…puted appellee’s unsworn claim that it did not possess the requested records, the trial court could not deny appellant’s petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing on this issue. See Ferrier v. Public Defender’s Office, 2d Jud. Cir. of Fla., 171 So. 3d 744 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015); Clay Cnty. Educ. Ass’n v. Clay Cnty. Sch. Bd., 144 So. 3d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Parish v. State, 59 So. 3d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Johanson v. State, 872 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066, 10…
-
Hollis v. Massa, 211 So. 3d 266 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)…ing whether an official is in possession of the requested materials, it is error for a trial court to deny a petition for writ of mandamus without conducting an evidentiary hearing. See Ferrier v. Pub. Def.’s Office, Second Judicial Circuit of Fla., 171 So. 3d 744, 744 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (holding that the trial court erred in not conducting an evidentiary hearing on [*269] the contested issue of whether the Public Defender’s Office had the requested materials in its possession, despite the Public Defender’s…
-
Tracy v. State, 219 So. 3d 958 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…nd, the State fails to provide sworn evidence that all available information has been provided, the trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on the issue prior to denying the claim. See Ferrier v. Pub. Defender’s Office, 2d Jud. Cir. of Fla., 171 So. 3d 744 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015); Clay Cnty. Educ. Ass’n v. Clay Cnty. Sch. Bd., 144 So. 3d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Parish, 59 So. 3d 1229; Johanson v. State, 872 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Accordingly, we reverse the order dismissing the petition and rem…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mikael Johanson v. State, 872 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Clay Cnty. Educ. Ass'n v. Clay Cnty. Sch. Bd., 144 So. 3d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)