Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

436 So. 2d 985

Docket No. 83-674.

State v. Jackson

The STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Mark JACKSON, Respondent.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 2, 1983.

Rehearing Denied September 21, 1983.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1983-08-02

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“"It is not the responsibility of the state to produce a witness subpoenaed by a defendant for discovery purposes; to order the state to do so, or to dismiss a criminal case for failure of the state to do so, constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law." (Italics supplied.)”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 533 So. 2d 884 - State v. Cecil

Relies on Dade County v. Baker · 305 So. 2d 836 - State v. Roig · 348 So. 2d 405 - State Ex Rel. Gerstein v. Durant

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1983-08-02

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2012

9 state decisions

501983199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*986 Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Penny Hershoff Brill, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

¶2Smoley & Grate and Joseph H. Weil, Miami, for respondent.

¶3Before HENDRY, HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5The respondent is charged with armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.

¶6During preparation for a second trial of respondent (a prior trial had resulted in a conviction and reversal on appeal), counsel for respondent served Loula Kyles with a subpoena for deposition. She failed to appear at the designated time, whereupon the trial court ordered the state to produce the witness. The state failed to produce the witness as ordered. Several other notices to appear were not responded to by Kyles. Respondent moved to exclude the witness on the basis of her numerous failures to appear. The trial court granted the respondent's motion to exclude the witness by written order.

¶7The state has petitioned for common law certiorari to quash the order granting respondent's motion to exclude. We find merit in the state's petition and quash the order under review.

¶8It is not the responsibility of the state to produce a witness subpoenaed by a defendant for discovery purposes; to order the state to do so, or to dismiss a criminal case for failure of the state to do so, constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law. State v. Adderly,411 So.2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Knight v. State,373 So.2d 52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied,385 So.2d 761 (Fla. 1980); 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).

¶9The petition for certiorari is granted and the order under review is quashed. It is so ordered.

/436/so2d/985 · .json · Public domain