Scott Saul said...
WHO KNOWS THEIR SPEEDY TRIAL ISSUES HERE?
The scene is Broward!
I have a client that was arrested, and had charges filed, for a felony and corresponding misdemeanor.Without ever taking a continuance and 170 days into the case, the State nolle prossed the felony. Because the client did not want to close the misdemeanor, the State had the Judge transfer the misdemeanor to county court. It took the Clerk's Office 3 days to create a county court case number.The day after the nolle prosse, but before the creation of the county court case number, I filed a NOE. I put the citation number on the pleading. The County Clerk's Office refused to take it and mandated that it be filed in circuit court (which was the still existing case number).
After 15 days passed, I filed a motion for discharge and set the motion.The Broward Judge denied the motion and struck my NOE. Her reasons were because;1) She felt that I should have requested a supervisor in County Court and forced them to take the pleading at that level;2) She felt that it was underhanded to file the NOE before a county case number was created and
3) There exists an "administrative order" where all lawyers must cc the Judge on the filing of a NOE. You must give them a courtesy copy.This order is not posted anywhere but I did not comply with it.(Can an administrative order expand, clarify or distinguish an enacted Rule of Criminal procedure?)
I feel that her reasons are no good. However, my concern is 3.191 (f). Under that rule, if a misdemeanor is consolidated with a felony, the applicable speedy trial time is the felony one.
In my case, if the felony is nolle prossed leaving just the misdemeanor, does the speedy trial time revert to 90 days or does the misdemeanor enjoy the 175 day period since it started out in a felony information? Did my filing of the NOE before the 175 days make it a nullity under 3.191( f)? Does a misdemeanor always get felony speedy trial treatment if it's point of origin is in Circuit Court? I want to take a writ on the Judge's ruling yet not if 3.191(f) makes her (seemingly) erroneous ruling immaterial.
Instead of bashing lawyers and spreading gossip, this is what the blog should be for? What do y'all think?