State v. Ashley, 79-1317
| Decision Date | 10 February 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 79-1317,79-1317 |
| Parties | The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Robert ASHLEY, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Janet Reno, State Atty. and Ira N. Loewy, Asst. State Atty., for appellant.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Deborah Whisnant, Asst. Public Defender, for appellee.
Before HUBBART, C. J., and DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
By this appeal, we are asked to review a trial court order dismissing an information in a criminal case for failure of the state to produce, pursuant to court order, certain out-of-state witnesses for the defendant for the purpose of taking their discovery deposition after said witnesses had been listed by the state as potential state witnesses in the case. We have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. § 924.07(1), Fla.Stat. (1979).
We reverse the order under review and remand the cause to the trial court with directions to reinstate the information in this cause upon a holding that: (1) the state may not be compelled by court order to produce out-of-state witnesses for the defendant to take their discovery deposition when such witnesses are listed by the state as potential witnesses in a criminal case; (2) it is reversible error for a trial court to dismiss a criminal case for failure of the state to produce such witnesses pursuant to court order; and (3) no showing was made in this case that the state intentionally or negligently suppressed any evidence in this cause, or, indeed, that the evidence claimed to be suppressed was in any way favorable to the defendant. State ex rel. Gerstein v. Durant, 348 So.2d 405 (Fla.3d DCA 1977); State v. Roig, 305 So.2d 836 (Fla.3d DCA 1974); see State v. Herrera, 365 So.2d 399, 401 (Fla.3d DCA), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 459 (Fla.1978).
Reversed and remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Del Gaudio, s. 82-770
...informants, the informants' refusal to testify on self-incrimination grounds was not a discovery violation); State v. Ashley, 393 So.2d 1168 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (dismissal improper where State fails to produce out-of-state witness for deposition, since State under no obligation to do so); St......
-
State v. Carda, 85-1858
...to produce witnesses for deposition or trial. State v. Mesa, 395 So.2d 242, 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); see Merritt; State v. Ashley, 393 So.2d 1168 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Knight v. State, 373 So.2d 52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So.2d 761 (Fla.1980); State v. Banks, 349 So.2d 736 (Fla.......
-
State v. Mesa
...prosecution, much less defense, witnesses for deposition or trial. State v. Merritt, 394 So.2d 531 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); State v. Ashley, 393 So.2d 1168 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (1981); Knight v. State, 373 So.2d 52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So.2d 761 (Fla.1980); State v. Banks, 349 So......
-
State v. Kiser
...attempt to order the State to produce an out-of-state prosecution witness for an in-state deposition. See, e.g., State v. Ashley, 393 So.2d 1168, 1168 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1981). The Florida rules are similar to ours, and the decisions in that state are persuasive authority for the interpretati......