Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

549 So. 2d 218

N.L. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 5, 1989

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1989-09-05

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1989

1 state decisions

Relies on 246 So. 2d 771 - Richardson v. State · 472 So. 2d 1177 - CU Associates, Inc. v. RB Grove, Inc. · Ivester v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1989-09-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1This is an appeal from an adjudication of delinquency. We affirm.

¶2The purpose of the discovery rules is to assist a defendant in the preparation of his defense and not as an avenue for avoidance of the consequences of an unfavorable trial, absent a showing of prejudice or harm to his case. Ivester v. State, 398 So.2d 926*219(Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Ludwick v. State, 336 So.2d 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).

¶3The trial court conducted an adequate inquiry into the State’s discovery violation, and the violation was neither willful nor prejudicial. See Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771 (Fla.1971); Johnson v. State, 461 So.2d 1385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), review denied, 472 So.2d 1181 (Fla.1985). Affirmed.

/549/so2d/218 · .json · Public domain