Heller v. State

William Steven HELLER, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 28, 1992.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1992-07-28

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 2004

4 state decisions

Relies on Tascarella v. Seay · Wooden v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-07-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Leighton G. Morse, Key West, George T. Pallas, Miami, for petitioner.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Leslie Schreiber, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

¶3Before NESBITT, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5While this appeal was pending, we decided J.T. v. State,601 So.2d 283 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (citing Tascarella v. Seay,564 So.2d 205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)), which is dispositive. The fifteen-day window period provided the State by rule 3.191(i)(3), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, to proceed with a trial of the defendant after the speedy trial period has expired and a motion for discharge has been filed, may not be extended for exceptional circumstances by a motion filed within the window period.

¶6Prohibition is granted. The order denying the motion for discharge is quashed.