STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL., ROBERT W. BALL, JR., RELATOR,
v.
HONORABLE MURRAY GOODMAN, JUDGE, CRIMINAL COURT OF RECORD IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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 granted prohibition against trial judge's order to proceed with perjury prosecution where the statute of limitations had expired after the state dismissed the initial prosecution by nolle prosequi.
Once a prosecution is commenced within the statute of limitations but dismissed by nolle prosequi after the limitations period expires, a subsequent prosecution for the same offense is barred.
[1] Once a prosecution is timely commenced within the statute of limitations but dismissed by nolle prosequi after the limitations period expires, a subsequent prosecution fo…
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 intelligenceRelator was initially charged by information with perjury committed on July 27, 1967, within the two-year statute of limitations under § 932.05 Fla.St…
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 Nolle Prosequi cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an original proceeding in prohibtion. The suggestion alleged there was an initial prosecution of the relator by information filed in the criminal court of record of Dade County, charging the relator with having committed the crime of perjury on July 27, 1967; that the initial prosecution was commenced within the two year limitation period provided by § 932.05 Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and that it had been terminated by the state by nolle prosequi at a time which was more than two years after the date of said alleged offense; that thereafter the present information had been filed in the criminal court of record charging the relator with said offense of July 27, 1967; and that notwithstanding relator’s claim the statute of limitation had run, the trial court has ordered relator to be tried thereon.
This court issued a rule nisi in prohibition, to which the respondent filed a response. On consideration thereof after argument on notice we hold the response fails to show cause why prohibition should not issue. Accordingly, we grant judgment in prohibition in favor of the relator, on authority of State v. Guerra, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d 889; and State v. Garcia, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d 293. We assume that in view of our holding in this matter it will not become necessary to issue a formal writ of prohibition herein.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McBRIDE v. Pratt & Whitney & Ace USA, 909 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…7, at 506 (2005 ed.). The same is generally true when the state enters a nol pros in a criminal prosecution. See, e.g., 21 Am.Jur.2d Criminal Law § 315 (2005); Geiger v. State, 532 So. 2d 1298, 1301 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); State ex rel. Ball v. Goodman, 249 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); State v. Guerra, 245 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); State v. Garcia, 245 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). We have previously inferred that this rule applies in workers’ compensation cases. Kinsey v. Skyline Corp., 395 So. 2d 626,…
-
DI Stefano v. Langston, 274 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 1973)…on1 is asserted between the Second District’s dismissal herein of petitioner’s suggestion for writ of prohibition by order dated July 19, 1972, 264 So. 2d 883, and the granting of such a prohibition in a similar factual situation in Ball v. Goodman, 249 So. 2d 481 (Fla.App.3d 1971), and conflict also with the decisions of this Court in Savage v. State, 18 Fla. 970 (1882); State ex rel. Silverman v. Coleman, 139 Fla. 656, 190 So. 811 (1939); Lowe v. State, 154 Fla. 730, 19 So. 2d 106 (1944); and Mead v. State,…
-
Matos v. State, 961 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…e information addressed to the same charges, it was after the statute of limitations expired. Compare Geiger v. State, 532 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Consequently, Ma-tos’s motion to dismiss should have been granted. See, e.g., Ball v. Goodman, 249 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). Petition Granted. SHAHOOD, C.J., STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Garcia, 245 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- State v. Guerra, 245 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)