Case ID: so2d_581/html/0243-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James M. SNOWDEN, Petitioner, v. Marvin S. DAVIS, Esquire, Respondent.
    No. 91-9.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    June 13, 1991.
    James M. Snowden, pro se.
    No appearance for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

We deny Snowden’s petition for writ of mandamus directed to his former private counsel to obtain a copy of a transcript of criminal proceedings, which may be in the attorney’s possession. If Snowden has not been furnished a complete copy, he may well be entitled to obtain it through other means; i.e., replevin filed in the circuit court. See Dubose v. Shelnutt, 566 So.2d 921 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Florida Rules of Professional Conduct 4-1.16(d). Our denial in this instance is without prejudice to Snowden to pursue other remedies. However, mandamus to this court is inappropriate because Snowden’s attorney is not a “public official.” See Hatten v. State, 561 So.2d 562 (Fla.1990); Puckett v. Gentry, 577 So.2d 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).

Petition for writ of mandamus DENIED.

COBB, W. SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.