State ex rel. Flowers v. Goodman, 70--1004
| Decision Date | 01 December 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 70--1004,70--1004 |
| Citation | 241 So.2d 457 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida ex rel. Eddie James FLOWERS, Relator, v. The Honorable Murray GOODMAN, as Judge of the Criminal Court of Record in and for Dade County, Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Hughlan Long, Public Defender, and Richard A. Beiley, Asst. Public Defender, for relator.
Richard E. Gerstein, State Atty., and Joseph Durant, Asst. State Atty., for respondent.
Before PEARSON, C.J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.
The petitioner filed a suggestion for a writ of prohibition in which he set up the claimed right of discharge because of his compliance with § 915.01(2) Fla.Stat., F.S.A. Rule nisi was issued and the respondent has filed a brief and a response. From the briefs and oral argument it appears that there is no substantial issue as to the fact that the petitioner has complied with the statute and is entitled to discharge unless he has acquiesced in the continuance of the cause.
The state presents a record showing that at the time of the continuance of the cause during the third term of the court in which appropriate demand for speedy trial had been filed, the petitioner who was represented by the public defender made no comment and therefore made no objection upon the state's request for a continuance and the court's granting thereof. The state urges that this failure to object constitutes a waiver by acquiescence and that the petitioner is therefore not entitled to discharge.
We hold that a simple failure to object is not a waiver by ascquiescence under the provisions of § 915.01(2) Fla.Stat., F.S.A. Cf. State ex rel. Leon v. Baker, Fla.1970, 238 So.2d 281; State ex rel. Johnson v. Edwards, Fla.1970, 233 So.2d 393; Anderson v. Edwards, as Judge, Fla.App.1970, 234 So.2d 720.
Having reached this decision we do not issue the writ, being confident that it will not be necessary under the circumstances of this case.
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stuart v. State
...v. State, 339 So.2d 659), which conflicts with decisions in Gue v. State, 297 So.2d 135 (Fla.2d DCA 1974) and State ex rel. Flowers v. Goodman, 241 So.2d 457 (Fla.3d DCA 1970). We have jurisdiction, pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida After being taken into custody on November 8......
-
State ex rel. Retchin v. Turner
...an order dismissing the charges and discharging the petitioner in accordance with our holding herein. See also: State ex rel. Flowers v. Goodman, Fla.App.1970, 241 So.2d 457. ...
-
Harris v. Tyson, 72--424
...to a speedy trial providing that a demand for such speedy trial has been made within the meaning of Rule 3.191. State ex rel. Flowers v. Goodman, Fla.App.1970, 241 So.2d 457. We further hold however that the petitioner's 'request' for a speedy trial embodied within a written instrument enti......