From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Ochran

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Apr 6, 1983
429 So. 2d 77 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

No. 82-829.

April 6, 1983.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Broward County, Russell E. Seay, Jr., J.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Joy B. Shearer, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance by appellee.


The appealed order dismissed the information filed against Ochran for prearrest delay because approximately 16 months intervened between the time of the alleged offense and Ochran's arrest.

Our survey of the record reflects that Ochran has not suffered actual prejudice on account of the delay. Moreover, there is no evidence that the delay was intentionally caused by the State in order to gain a tactical advantage. Finding no other basis to support the trial court decision we reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate the information upon authority of U.S. v. McGough, 510 F.2d 598 (5th Cir. 1975); U.S. v. Avalos, 541 F.2d 1100 (5th Cir. 1976); State v. Newman, 367 So.2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971) and Howell v. State, 418 So.2d 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

LETTS, C.J., HERSEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Ochran

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Apr 6, 1983
429 So. 2d 77 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

State v. Ochran

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT, v. PAULA OCHRAN, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Apr 6, 1983

Citations

429 So. 2d 77 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing Cases

State v. Union

However, Union has failed to show that he has suffered actual prejudice because of the delay. See Barber v.…

Barber v. State

On the record before it the trial court correctly determined that actual prejudice was not proven by…