STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES POWELL, APPELLEE
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's appeal of assault charges was affirmed because the State violated the speedy trial rule and was collaterally estopped from prosecuting charges arising from the same criminal episode in which a jury found the defendant not guilty by reason of insanity.
The State was prohibited from prosecuting assault with intent to commit murder charges both for failure to comply with the speedy trial rule and because it was collaterally estopped by a prior acquittal on insanity grounds in a first degree murder trial arising from the same criminal episode.
[1] Collateral estoppel bars prosecution of assault charges when a jury has previously acquitted the defendant of a related murder charge on insanity grounds arising from the…
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 intelligenceAppellee was charged with three counts of assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree. A jury had previously found him not guilty by reas…
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 Same Criminal Episode cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.
The State appeals the dismissal of three informations charging the appellee with assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree.
Appellee moved to dismiss the informa-tions upon two grounds, to wit, that the State was collaterally estopped to prosecute the informations by reason of a prior finding by a jury verdict in a first degree murder trial arising out of the same criminal episode that appellee was not guilty by reason of insanity; also, that the prosecutions were barred by the provisions of the speedy trial rule. The trial court held that the State was collaterally estopped from prosecuting the charges under the case of Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469. The trial court did not specifically rule on the applicability of the speedy trial rule.
We hold that the State was prohibited from prosecuting all three charges for failure to comply with the speedy trial rule. State v. Boren, Fla.App.3d 1973, 273 So. 2d 415.
In addition, the trial judge was eminently correct in holding that the State was collaterally estopped from prosecuting the two charges alleging assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree of Officer Clark and Officer Morrow. For the foregoing reasons the orders appealed are
Affirmed.
GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Katz, 402 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 1981)…of the robbers. Since his identity as a robber of that game had been resolved in his favor, the state was collaterally estopped from relitigating his identity as a robber by reprosecuting for robbery of a different poker player. See State v. Powell, 314 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). In Katz the defendant was cleared only of stealing a 1977 Buick. The issue of whether he stole anything else, e. g., a 1975 Chevrolet, was never resolved in his favor and may be relitigated. See State v. Nocon, 352 So. 2d 910 (Fl…
-
Diosdado Nacher v. State, 465 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…State, 23 Md.App. 700, 329 A. 2d 751 (1974) (insanity as to November 20th murder not conclusive as to homicides on October 16th or December 11th). On the other hand, the cases cited by the appellant are either of little assistance, State v. Powell, 314 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975) (upholding, without factual detail, collateral estoppel effect of insanity acquittal to other crime during same episode), or, by virtue of their distinguishing characteristics, actually serve to demonstrate the correctness of the…
Authorities Cited
- Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1970)
- State v. Boren, 273 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)