Doctor v. State , 1D09–4531.
| Decision Date | 15 August 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D09–4531.,1D09–4531. |
| Citation | 68 So.3d 335 |
| Parties | Gregory DOCTOR, Appellant,v.STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Sheila Callahan, Assistant Conflict Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel Region One, Tallahassee, for Appellant.Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Donna A. Gerace, Assistant Attorney General, and Michael T. Kennett, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.BENTON, C.J.
Gregory Doctor appeals his convictions and sentences on fourteen felony counts, raising two points. He contends the trial court should have granted his motion for discharge under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 because the state filed its first formal charges more than 175 days after his arrest for the crimes of which he was convicted. He also contends the trial court should have granted his motion to dismiss because the statute of limitations had run on all counts. Prosecution for a second or third degree felony “must be commenced within 3 years after it is committed.” § 775.15(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2001). We reverse and remand with directions that he be discharged.
An arrest warrant having issued in Leon County, Mr. Doctor was arrested on November 2, 2005, and booked on sixteen Leon County felonies on November 5, 2005, in Pasco County. See Trainer v. Broome, 666 So.2d 1019, 1020 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (). A “person is taken into custody ... when the person is arrested as a result of the conduct or criminal episode that gave rise to the crime charged.” Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(d)(1). An arrest may occur, as here, without execution of an arrest warrant.
The speedy trial time continues to run after arrest, even when the state takes no further action. See State v. Williams, 791 So.2d 1088, 1091 (Fla.2001). In the present case on June 14, 2006, some six weeks after the 175–day speedy trial time period expired, the state filed a two-count information. See Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(a) (). Nearly six months later, the state filed an amended or supplemental fourteen-count information on December 4, 2006. Both pleadings charged crimes years in the past for which the appellant had been arrested in November of the year before.
If the state had filed charges within 175 days of appellant's arrest, the state would have been entitled to notice of expiration of speedy trial time and would have had the benefit of the recapture window provided for by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(p)(3). That part of the rule requires a prompt hearing after which the parties may have as much as ten days' notice of trial:
No later than 5 days from the date...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gilliam v. State
...The State may not file charges based on the same conduct after the speedy trial period has expired."); see also Doctor v. State , 68 So. 3d 335, 336–37 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) ("[T]he state loses the benefit of the recapture provision if it neglects to file charges until after expiration of the......
- Pierce v. State
-
Garrett v. State
...to the recapture window set forth in rule 3.191(p)(3). State v. Latundra Williams, 791 So.2d 1088, 1091 (Fla.2001); Doctor v. State, 68 So.3d 335, 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Petitioner asserts that the State failed to establish that the defendant was the cause for the delay in filing the info......
- Jones v. State
-
Pretrial motions and defenses
...175 after his arrest. The state is not entitled to a recapture period when it fails to file within 175 days of arrest. Doctor v. State, 68 So. 3d 335 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) When defendant in custody in another Florida county files a demand for speedy trial, under rule 3.191(b) he is entitled t......