McCaskill v. McMillan
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partErvin, Judge
I concur with the majority’s disposition of the case involving McCaskill’s petition, but dissent as to its disposition of the three remaining cases, because I agree with the Second District’s construction of rule 3.133(b), as set forth in Thomas v. Dyess, 557 So.2d 196, 197 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).1
Although rule 3.133(b) applies generally to adversary preliminary hearings, I believe that subsections (b)(1) and (b)(6) describe independent, although interrelated, procedures. Subsection (b)(6) requires automatic release of a defendant who has remained in custody for more than 40 days unless he or she…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ex parte BaileySupreme Court of Florida · 1897
- Bowens v. TysonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
- Thomas v. DyessDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990