WENDELL P. HOLMES, APPELLANT-PETITIONER,

v.

JOSEPH R. MCDANIEL, APPELLEE-RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• State v. Skolar, 692 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
  …certiorari because it violates the essential requirements of law. Carter v. State, 608 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); State v. Mendez, 423 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); State v. Wilcox, 351 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). See also State v. Barnes, 280 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973) (decided prior to Rule 3.190(j)). A district court of appeal can exercise certiorari review over a nonfinal pretrial order where the state would otherwise be deprived of the opportunity for review. State v. Bradford, 658 So. 2d 57…
• Carter v. State, 410 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
  …ime and I just would like permission from the Court to read the deposition. The record indicates that defense counsel’s efforts to obtain the witness occurred the day before trial. This case is distinguishable from the situation in State v. Barnes, 280 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 285 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1973), in which the court permitted the use of a deposition “where the state has the right to cross-examine” if the witness is “unavailable for good cause or has died.” In the case before us, there is…
• State v. Leonard, 376 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
  …to be equipped with a body recording device and transmitter. We hold that under these circumstances the above evidence was admissable for the purpose of authenticating Garcia’s consent. See 13 Fla.Jur. Evidence § 341 (1957) and Cf. State v. Barnes, 280 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973), cert. denied 285 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1973). Accordingly, we reverse that part of the order suppressing the tape recordings of the conversation between Garcia and Leonard. For the reasons stated those portions of the pretrial order…