Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

722 So. 2d 235

Docket No. 97-00327

Mathis v. State

James Edward MATHIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 25, 1998.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1998-11-25

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 2008

4 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“has a right to purchase transcripts of his court proceedings”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 914 So. 2d 1066 - Radford v. Brock

Relies on 597 So. 2d 940 - Staton v. McMillan · TT v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1998-11-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1James Edward Mathis, Sanderson, pro se.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Michael J. Scionti, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellant.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4James Edward Mathis appeals the denial of his petition for writ of mandamus. Mathis, in an effort to obtain transcripts of certain trial court proceedings, requested an order compelling the court reporter to inform him *236 of the cost for those transcripts. The trial court summarily denied Mathis's petition.

¶5We reverse because Mathis has a right to purchase transcripts of his court proceedings. See T.T. v. State,689 So.2d 1209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Staton v. McMillan,597 So.2d 940 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Further, a petition for writ of mandamus is the proper vehicle to seek review of the denial of access to judicial records. See Fla. R. Jud. Adm. 2.051(b)(d)(2). Since Mathis's petition showed a prima facie basis for relief, the trial court should have issued an order to show cause.

¶6Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

¶7PATTERSON, A.C.J., WHATLEY, J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., Senior Judge, Concur.

/722/so2d/235 · .json · Public domain