STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL., ROGER C. SLORA, PETITIONER,
v.
JOHN D. WESSEL, AS CIRCUIT JUDGE OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. 4th DCA | 1981-08-19
No. 81-1386
LETTS, C. J., and HERSEY, J., concur.
403 So. 2d 496 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1981) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied. Motion for rehearing, if any, must be filed by noon, Friday, August 21, 1981.

LETTS, C. J., and HERSEY, J., concur.

Concurrence
HURLEY, Judge,

HURLEY, Judge,

concurring specially.

I concur with the court’s determination because, in my view, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the trial judge is a “material witness,” i. e., that he possesses relevant information “going to some fact affecting the merits of the cause . . . about which no other witness might testify.” Wingate v. Mach, 117 Fla. 104, 157 So. 421, 422 (1934) (emphasis supplied). Rule 8.220(b)(1)(viii), Fla.R.Crim.P., provides a mechanism by which the state may obtain a handwriting exemplar from the defendant. Thus, through the use of expert testimony, there exists an alternate but well-recognized method for establishing the authorship and integrity of the document in question without requiring testimony from the trial judge.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Sardinas v. Claridania Lagares, 805 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
    …is one who possesses information “going to some fact affecting the merits of the cause and about which no other witness might testify.” Wingate v. Mach, 117 Fla. 104, 157 So. 421, 422 (1934) (emphasis added); see also State ex rel. Slora v. Wessel, 403 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (Hurley, J., concurring specially). As the petitioner has not even alleged that Dr. Glatzer is a material witness, the cases cited by the dissent are inapposite.3 Our denial of the petition is expressly without prejudice to the…
  • Pozo v. Roadhouse Grill, Inc., 790 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
    …l defendant, venue is only proper in the county of joint residence.2 Enfinger v. Baxley, 96 So. 2d 538 (Fla.1957); Lifemark Hospitals of Florida, Inc. v. Roque, 727 So. 2d 1077, 1078 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), Methodist Hospital Foundation, Inc. v. Irvin, 403 So. 2d 496, 498 (Fla. 1st. DCA 1981). Because the record fails to establish where any defendant’s residence is located, venue in Orange County cannot be based upon residence. Where the Cause of Action Accrued Pozo contends, that the cause of action accrued i…
  • van Fripp v. State, 412 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
    …trial judge possessed relevant information “going to some fact affecting the merits of the cause and about which no other witness might testify.” Wingate v. Mach, 117 Fla. 104, 157 So. 421, 422 (1934). See also State ex rel. Slora [*916] v. Wessel, 403 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (Hurley, J., concurring specially). In addition, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion to set aside his plea and conviction. Accordingly, both orders are AFFIRMED. LETTS, C. J., and…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw