Legal Opinion

State v. Bouma

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 28, 1989No. 89-1700PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POLEN, Judge.

In this case we are asked to review the trial court’s order dismissing the case for lack of prosecution because the state was unable to produce a key witness, the victim, at a deposition. We find this was an improper exercise of discretion and reverse.

Whether the dismissal was a sanction for failure to appear for a deposition or based on the conclusion that the state had no reasonable expectation of finding the witness and prosecuting the case, the trial court infringed upon the state’s territory. The decision to prosecute is a determination to be made by the state, not the trial…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. WilsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
  2. State v. BrownDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
  3. State v. BryantDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  4. State v. PerezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  5. State v. DaiseDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. VixamarDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
  2. STATE OF FLORIDA v. PELAYO CERULIADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2024
  3. State v. BurkeDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API