C.H., A JUVENILE
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2024-08-07
No. 2022-1713
Logue, C.J., Emas, J., Fernandez, J., Zayas, J.
2024 FL 9480 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2024)

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.

Holding

The State's failure to disclose two vulgar words used by the juvenile when threatening his mother did not materially hinder the defense because the words were merely cumulative given the severity of the threats.

Headnotes

[1] Nondisclosure of evidence does not constitute reversible error under the discovery rules when the withheld information is merely cumulative to information already disclos…

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
Key Quotes

“the State's failure to disclose in these circumstances did not 'materially hinder[ ] the defense' because the two words were merely cumulative given the enormity of C.H.'s threats”

Court's analysis of whether nondisclosure of vulgar words constituted reversible error
Facts & Procedural History

C.H., a juvenile, was charged with first-degree misdemeanor battery and second-degree misdemeanor assault after threatening to kill his mother while b…

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.

Topics
Richardson Inquiry Withheld Adjudication Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Richardson Inquiry cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
Logue

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed August 7, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________

No. 3D22-1713 Lower Tribunal No. 22-337 ________________

C.H., a juvenile, Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Angelica D. Zayas, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Andrew Stanton, Special Assistant Public Defender, and Daniela Pachon and Maria Perez, Certified Legal Interns, for appellant/cross-appellee.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee/cross-appellant.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

LOGUE, C.J.

C.H., a juvenile, appeals from a final order withholding adjudication of delinquency and placing him on probation for first-degree misdemeanor

Affirmed.

1 Richardson v. State, 246 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 1971).

Footnotes
2 battery and second-degree misdemeanor assault. C.H.’s sole argument on appeal is that the trial court failed to conduct an adequate Richardson1 inquiry. The State disclosed witness statements to the defense during discovery that stated C.H. repeatedly threatened to kill his mother as he charged her brandishing a metal pipe. The witness testimony at trial, however, was that, when threatening to kill his mother, C.H. referred to her using two vulgar words. Even if the State’s failure to disclose these two words constituted a discovery violation, an issue we do not reach, the State’s failure to disclose in these circumstances did not “materially hinder[ ] the defense” because the two words were merely cumulative given the enormity of C.H.’s threats. State v. Schopp, 653 So. 2d 1016, 1020 (Fla. 1995).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw