From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hernandez

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 5, 1991
573 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 90-67.

February 5, 1991.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County; Phillip S. Davis, Judge.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Giselle D. Lylen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Asst. Public Defender, for appellee.

Before FERGUSON, JORGENSON and GERSTEN, JJ.


We summarily reverse the order granting an ore tenus motion to dismiss an information which charges the defendant with grand theft of an automobile. State v. Adderly, 411 So.2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (a motion to dismiss an information must specifically allege the grounds on which it is based); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.190(a).

Pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(g), the State has a ninety day period in which to bring the defendant to trial following the date of receipt by the trial court of this mandate.

Reversed and remanded for further consistent proceedings.


Summaries of

State v. Hernandez

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 5, 1991
573 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

State v. Hernandez

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT, v. ROGELIO HERNANDEZ, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Feb 5, 1991

Citations

573 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

State v. Mitchum

Mitchum's "tipsy coachman" argument that the State failed to present a prima facie case is also without merit…

State v. Hernandez

This case is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith. See State v. Hernandez, 573 So.2d 1037 n.…