Thursday, September 2, 2010

Law Updates for August 27, 2010

Martin, 35 FLW 1876, 4th DCA, Alibi witnesses. Trial court abused its discretion in excluding defendant's two alibi witnesses under rule 3.200. The defense was not required to provide state with the alibi witnesses when the state did not comply with 3.200, written demand for notice of the alibi. The defense did not have to comply with 3.200 because they participated in discovery and thus were required to supply the state with defense witnesses under Rule 3.220(d)(1)(A). Trial court was required to conduct a Richardson hearing for this discovery violation, failed to do so. Not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. New Trial.

Walton, 35 FLW 1895, 2nd DCA, Where evidence established that all three occupants of the vehicle had been drinking and showed signs of impairment, and that vehicle ran a red light, collided with another vehicle, and caused serious injury to the occupant of the other vehicle, it is not necessary for the state to prove the identity of the driver to establish that DUI-SBI had occurred. An interesting corpus delicti discussion.

The Law Offices of Roger P. Foley,P.A.

No comments: