Case Name: Brian K. GLASS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2002-11-15
Citations: 832 So. 2d 837
Docket Number: No. 5D02-111
Parties: Brian K. GLASS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: THOMPSON, C.J., and SAWAYA, J., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 832
Pages: 837–838

Head Matter:
Brian K. GLASS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 5D02-111.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Nov. 15, 2002.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 26, 2002.
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Meghan Ann Collins, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Richard E. Doran, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lamya Henry, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Ap-pellee.

Opinion:
HARRIS, J.
Glass was arrested when he refused to leave a drinking establishment after receiving a warning. On the way to jail, he kicked the window out of the police cruiser. He was initially charged with felony criminal mischief (having had one or more such violation previously) and trespass after warning, a misdemeanor. At this point, the circuit court had jurisdiction. However, just before trial, the State filed its fourth (and final) information charging only two misdemeanors, simple criminal mischief and trespass after warning. The circuit court, now without jurisdiction, proceeded to try Glass and he was convicted of felony criminal mischief (now not charged) and the misdemeanor trespass. Because the circuit court lacked jurisdiction based on the information which established the charges at the time of trial, we reverse.
The State claims that there was no error because the court conducted a bifurcated hearing pursuant to State v. Harbaugh, 754 So.2d 691 (Fla.2000). While Har-baugh does stand for the proposition that a bifurcated trial is necessary to try a defendant for a felony based on previous misdemeanor convictions, still the information before the court must charge such offense. Because there was no such charge before this court at the time of trial, the court lacked jurisdiction to conduct any trial, bifurcated or not.
REVERSED.
THOMPSON, C.J., and SAWAYA, J., concur.