JOHN W. BESHAW, JACQUELINE ANN FREEMAN, SUSAN E. FINN, KATHY FINN, EDVIN V. FAIRINNHOLT, GARY J. CAMBLIN, LOIS LUNDQUIST, JAMES MORROW, MAUREEN MCDERMOTT, PHILLIP MASSETTI, MICHAEL W. MALLES, FRANCES T. MCGLYNN, ZELMA J. PEREIRA, RORY PASTORIUS, HENRY PATINO, KATHLEEN VACHERESSE, THOMAS E. KRYST, AND CHARLES TODELL, APPELLANTS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Defendants appealed a circuit court's denial of their petition for a writ of prohibition in a criminal trespass case, arguing the state violated discovery rules and that they were denied speedy trial rights. The court affirmed, holding that the state complied with discovery obligations and defendants waived their speedy trial rights by announcing lack of readiness on the trial date.
The court affirmed the denial of the writ of prohibition, holding that the state complied with discovery rules, the defendants waived their speedy trial rights by announcing unreadiness on the trial date, and the delay in arraignment did not compel charging the continuance to the state or hinder trial preparation.
[1] The proper method of appellate review from a circuit court's final order denying a petition for a writ of prohibition is by appeal.
[2] A defendant's announcement on the day of trial that they are not ready to proceed, after discovery materials have been promptly provided, constitutes a waiver of speedy t…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the state promptly provided the defendants with discovery materials on the same day they were requested and in no way violated the discovery rules”
Establishes that the state complied with discovery obligations, rejecting defendants' argument
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendants were charged with criminal trespass in county court. The state provided discovery materials on the same day they were requested. Defendants…
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 Motion For Continuance cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This was originally an appeal by the defendants John W. Beshaw, et al., from a final order of the circuit court denying their petition for a writ of prohibition. Thereafter, we entered an order treating the notice of appeal as a petition for a writ of certiorari. Upon further reflection, however, we conclude that the proper method of review from a final order of the circuit court denying a petition for a writ of prohibition is by appeal. See, e.g., Granade v. Ader, 530 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 541 So. 2d 1172 (Fla.1988); State v. Brown, 527 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Bradley v. McDermott, 466 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Caverly v. State, 436 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); compare Hoffman v. Land, 55 So. 2d 806 (Fla.1951); Conner v. Mid-Florida Growers, Inc., 541 So. 2d 1252, 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); City of Miami Beach v. State ex rel. Pickin’ Chicken of Lincoln Road, Inc., 129 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).
On the merits, we affirm. The record reflects that the state promptly provided the defendants with discovery materials on the same day they were requested and in no way violated the discovery rules. Accordingly, the trial court did not, as urged, err in granting the defendants’ motion for continuance chargeable to the defense (rather than the state) in this criminal trespass case in county court, after the defendants announced on the day of trial [during the 15-day speedy trial window] that they were not ready to proceed. This being so, the defendants waived their speedy trial rights under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.191, the court properly denied the defendants’ motion for discharge, and the circuit court was eminently correct in denying the defendants’ petition for a writ of prohibition. Granade; cf. State v. Del Gaudio, 445 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 453 So. 2d 45 (Fla.1984).
As for the failure to arraign the defendants until during the 15-day speedy trial window, we are cited to no authority that this delay compelled the trial court to charge the defense continuance herein to the state. Indeed, we conclude that this delay in no way hindered the defendants in their preparation for trial and did not compel the defendants to request a continuance in this case.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Loftis v. State, 682 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…etta v. Hamrick, 656 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 5th DCA); rev. denied, 663 So. 2d 630 (Fla.1995). Therefore, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(c), we treated the petition for writ of certiorari as a notice of appeal. Id.; Beshaw v. State, 586 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); State v. Brown, 527 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Based upon State v. Agee, 622 So. 2d 473 (Fla.1993), we reverse the circuit court’s order and remand with instructions to discharge Loftis. Loftis was arrested for driving under…
-
Monroe Cnty. v. Kazi Foods OF KEY W., Inc., 731 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…PER CURIAM. We treat the petition for writ of certio-rari as an appeal, see Beshaw v. State, 586 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), and affirm [*169] the circuit court order disqualifying the special master. Affirmed.…
-
Rivera v. State, 939 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…We deny rehearing. However, we certify that our decision is in conflict with Housing Auth. of Tampa v. Burton, 873 So. 2d 356, 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). The State argues that Beshaw v. State, 586 So. 2d 1284, 1284 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (concluding that “that the proper method of review from a final order of the circuit court denying a petition for writ or prohibition is by appeal”), and State v. Brown, 527 So. 2d 207, 208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (“The order of…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. del Gaudio, 445 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Doyle Conner v. Mid-Florida Growers, Inc., 541 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- Granade v. Honorable Marshall H. Ader, 530 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- City OF Miami Beach v. State ex rel. Pickin' Chicken OF Lincoln Rd., Inc., 129 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)
- Bradley v. Honorable Michael McDERMOTT, 466 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- State v. Brown, 527 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Caverly v. State, 436 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)