JAMES BRADLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Speedy Trial Right cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a judgment pursuant to a jury verdict.
The points raised by appellant are (1) does defendant have a right to preliminary hearing and (2) does defendant and his counsel have a reasonable period of time to prepare for trial after arraignment.
The facts are that the defendant was charged by an information. The Supreme Court of Florida, as well as this Court, has held that a probable cause having been found by the filing of the infor*533mation, the purpose of a preliminary hearing has been met.1
The defendant had filed at least two motions to advance the cause, and the trial court took the defendant and his counsel at their words, and set the trial for two days after arraignment and within about four to six weeks after the filing of the information. The defendant’s counsel should not have asked for a speedy trial if he was not ready to go to trial.
We see no error in this cause and the judgment and sentence are hereby affirmed.
SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cameron v. State, 291 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)…inary hearing where either an indictment or information was returned or filed. Maxwell v. Blount, Fla.App.1971, 250 So. 2d 657, aff’d Fla.1972, 261 So. 2d 175; State ex rel. Hardy v. Blount, Fla. 1972, 261 So. 2d 172; Bradley v. State, Fla.App.1972, 265 So. 2d 532; Sangaree v. Hamlin, Fla.1970, 235 So. 2d 729; State v. Hernandez, Fla. 1968, 217 So. 2d 109; Palmieri v. State, Fla. 1967, 198 So. 2d 633. Effective February 1, 1973, the rule was renumbered to 3.131(a) and changed to read, “A defendant, unless cha…
-
Alphonso Williams v. State, 296 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)…lar requirement of Section 901.23, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., was in effect at the time of appellant’s arrest, but a preliminary hearing is not required where the state prosecutes by information (as in this case). See Bradley v. State, Fla.App. (1st) 265 So. 2d 532, cert. den., 411 U.S. 916, 93 S.Ct. 1543, 36 L.Ed.2d 307. Fourth, appellant contends he was denied effective assistance of counsel. On this point, appellant states his appointed counsel had a conflict of interest in that he was employed as county p…
-
Pugh v. Rainwater, 483 F.2d 778 (5th Cir. 1973)…t, which shall set forth the facts showing the offense for which the person was arrested; or, if that magistrate is absent or unable to act, before the nearest or most accessible magistrate in the same county.” (Emphasis added). . Bradley v. State, 265 So. 2d 532 (Fla.App. 1972), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 916, 93 S.Ct. 1543, 36 L.Ed.2d 307; Anderson v. State, 241 So. 2d 390 (Fla.1970) ; Sangaree v. Hamlin, 235 So. 2d 729 (Fla.1970) ; State v. Hernandez, 217 So. 2d 109 (Fla.1968) ; Palmieri v. State, 198 So. 2d…
Authorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. Inga Susan Hardy & Terry Neal Hardy v. Uriel Blount, Jr., 261 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1972)
- Gilbert v. State, 250 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- Maxwell v. Uriel Blount, Jr., 250 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)