ROGERS
v.
STATE
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.
A petition for mandamus to compel production of public records must be remanded for an evidentiary hearing when the record lacks any claimed exemptions to disclosure and disputed factual issues exist regarding whether the respondent possesses the requested records.
[1] A summary denial of a petition for writ of mandamus is improper when disputed factual issues remain regarding the existence of requested records and the applicability of…
[2] When a petition for writ of mandamus and its response raise disputed factual issues, the trial court must resolve them upon proper evidence, which may include undisputed…
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 intelligenceRogers petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel the State's public records specialist to provide various documents. The trial court summarily denie…
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 Disclosure cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLER, J.
Antwann L. Rogers appeals the summary denial of his petition for writ of mandamus which sought to compel the State’s public records specialist to provide him with various documents.1 As the State properly concedes, the record is devoid of claimed exemptions to disclosure, and there remains a disputed factual issue as to whether the State possesses the requested records. Thus, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing. See DeGregorio v. State, 205 So. 3d 841 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (reversing a denial of petition upon unsworn pleadings and remanding for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the respondent had furnished all records);
Perez v. State, 980 So. 2d 1205, 1206 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (“If the petition and response raise disputed factual issues, the trial court should resolve them upon proper evidence, which may include undisputed affidavits.”); Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (reversing a dismissal of petition in the absence of sworn evidence and remanding for further proceedings).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Radford v. Brock, 914 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Gordon Polley, M.D., & N. Fla. Surgeons, P.A. v. Gardner, 98 So. 3d 648 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Clay Cnty. Educ. Ass'n v. Clay Cnty. Sch. Bd., 144 So. 3d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Ronald Council v. State, 980 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- DeGREGORIO v. State, 205 So. 3d 841 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)