STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
LARRY PAUL GRAVLEE, 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.
A demand for speedy trial under Rule 1.191 does not commence the speedy trial period until after a formal charge (indictment, information, or trial affidavit) has been filed.
Respondent was discharged from prosecution after filing a speedy trial demand before any formal charge was filed. The District Court affirmed this dis…
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 Commencement Of Speedy Trial Period cases and more on FLexlaw
Petition for writ of certiorari was filed in this cause by the State of Florida based upon the conflict between the decision sub judice of the District Court of Appeal, First District, reported at 272 So.2d 889, and our decision in State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman, 253 So.2d 129 (1971). Fla. Const., Art. V, Sec. 3(b)(3), F.S.A. Oral argument was dispensed with pursuant to F.A.R. 3.10(e), 32 F.S.A.
The District Court affirmed, per curiam, the order of the trial judge discharging respondent from criminal prosecution under Rule 1.191, Cr.P.R. (now 3.191), 33 F.S.A. The basis of the discharge was a demand *481for speedy trial filed by respondent fifty-three days before any indictment, information or trial affidavit had been filbd against him. Respondent was discharged only twenty-five days after an information had been filed.
In State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman, supra, we held:
“Under the provisions of Rule 1.191, . the 60-day period does not begin to run until a demand for trial by the defendant has been filed in accordance with the provisions of the rule after defendant has been charged with a crime by indictment, information or trial affidavit(Emphasis added.)
We see no reason to recede from our above-quoted decision. We therefore reverse the District Court with directions to remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with' this opinion.
It is so ordered.
CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Winford Dickey v. Honorable Raymond T. McNEAL, 445 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…ovided in this Rule. [*695] Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(a)(2) allows for a demand for speedy trial to be made after the information or indictment is filed. See State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman, 253 So. 2d 129 (Fla.1971); State v. Gravlee, 276 So. 2d 480 (Fla.1973). The 60-day limit provided therein begins to run from the date of demand, without any regard to the date a person is placed in custody, as under 3.191(a)(1) (180-day limit for felony charges).1 See also O’Bryan v. State, 326 So. 2d 83 (Fl…
-
State v. Humphrey, 363 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)…, Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.191(a)(2). Defendant’s demand for speedy trial, filed prior to the filing of the-information, was a nullity and was ineffective as a demand for speedy trial entitling defendant to discharge under Rule 3.191(a)(2). State v. Gravlee, 276 So. 2d 480 (Fla.1973); State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman, 253 So. 2d 129 (Fla.1971); State v. Hill, 299 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974), quashed in part 313 So. 2d 766 (Fla.1975). Accordingly, the order discharging defendant under the speedy trial rule is reversed…
-
State v. Hill, 299 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)…454: “Inasmuch as the demand for speedy trial was filed (after arrest) prior to the filing of the information, it is clear that the demand for speedy trial was premature and ineffective. * * *” (at page 455) In State v. Gravlee, Sup.Ct.Fla. 1973, 276 So. 2d 480, our Supreme Court held that the 60 day period provided by the rule does not begin to run until a demand for trial by the defendant has been filed in accordance with the provisions of the rule after defendant has been charged with á crime by indictm…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. Terry Michael Hanks & Rudolph Frank Seymour v. The Honorable Murray Goodman, 253 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1971)
- State v. Gravlee, 272 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
- Nancie v. Jones, 272 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)