Case ID: fla-supp-2d_24/html/0173-01.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

STATE OF FLORIDA v KING
    Case No. 86-216AC (County Court Case No. 21513,4,5MB)
    Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Appellate Division, Dade County
    September 1, 1987
    APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    Charles M. Fahlbusch, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.
    Frederick E. Graves for appellee.
    Before FEDER, FULLER, KORNBLUM, JJ.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

Defendant King was arrested and charged with Driving While Impaired by alcohol and no valid driver’s license. Neither defendant nor her attorney appeared for the scheduled arraignment. Trial was nevertheless set but continued twice at the request of the defendant. Defendant thereafter moved for discharge alleging violation of the Speédy Trial Rule. This appeal is from the order discharging the defendant.

It is a well established rule that when a defendant, or her attorney, is not available for trial for whatever reason, no order for discharge can issue. Rule 3.191(e), R.Cr.P.

Further, as clearly stated by the Supreme Court of Florida, any continuance granted at the request of the defense constitutes a waiver of the right to a speedy trial under the rule. Butterworth v. Fluellen, 389 So.2d 968 (Fla. 1980).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.