Legal Opinion

State v. Hockett

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 26, 1999No. Nos. 98-02826, 98-03657Published

1Per curiam

We affirm the trial court’s decision to dismiss the informations in these two interrelated cases because the State failed to allege an intent to defraud as an element of the offense described in section 319.33(1)(e), Florida Statutes (1997). See State v. Copher, 395 So.2d 635 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); The trial court’s oral ruling allowed the State ten days to amend these informations, but the written order omitted this option. On remand, it is not necessary that the State have ten days within which to amend the informations. The State may amend at any time unless prevented by the constitutional…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. CopherDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
  2. State v. BaconDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API