IN THE INTEREST OF J.B., A CHILD
IN THE INTEREST OF J.B., A CHILD
622 So. 2d 1175
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1993)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We agree with appellant that the trial court failed to conduct a proper inquiry when the state called an important, but previously undisclosed witness at trial. See Brey v. State, 382 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Instead of determining the circumstances of the discovery violation and requiring the state to demonstrate the lack of prejudice to the juvenile accused, the court imposed the burden on the accused to demonstrate prejudice. This does not satisfy the procedure contemplated by Richardson v. State, 246 So. 2d 771 (Fla.1971).
ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and BIRKEN, ARTHUR M., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 63 So. 3d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…demonstrate prejudice instead of determining the circumstances of the discovery violation and requiring the State to demonstrate lack of prejudice to the defendant, does not satisfy the procedure contemplated by Richardson. See In Interest of J.B., 622 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). In Henry v. State, 42 So. 3d 328 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010), the State sought to qualify a police officer, who was listed as a Category A witness, as an expert witness based on his field experience as a member of a drug unit. Henry obj…
Authorities Cited
- Richardson v. State, 246 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 1971)
- Brey v. State, 382 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)