From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. Moore

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 10, 1984
447 So. 2d 383 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

No. 84-118.

March 13, 1984. Rehearing Denied April 10, 1984.

A Case of Original Jurisdiction — Prohibition.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Karen M. Gottlieb and Bruce Rosenthal, Asst. Public Defenders, for petitioner.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Richard E. Doran, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and FERGUSON, JJ.


Based on the controlling authority of Healey v. State, 389 So.2d 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), we grant the petition for a writ of prohibition herein and direct that the respondent trial judge grant the petitioner's motion for discharge filed below. As the respondent, through counsel, concedes, Healey is factually indistinguishable from the instant case and compels the result we reach today. We will withhold issuance of a formal writ of prohibition as we are confident that the respondent will discharge the petitioner upon receipt of this opinion.

Prohibition granted.


Summaries of

Clark v. Moore

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 10, 1984
447 So. 2d 383 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Clark v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:ARNOLD CLARK, PETITIONER, v. THE HONORABLE EDWARD N. MOORE, AS JUDGE OF…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Apr 10, 1984

Citations

447 So. 2d 383 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

State v. Barreiro

But because rule 3.191(g) refers specifically to an "appeal," it is not applicable where the review is sought…