Case Name: Charles Lenny PURVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1998-07-27
Citations: 713 So. 2d 1118
Docket Number: No. 97-2225
Parties: Charles Lenny PURVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: MINER, WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 713
Pages: 1118–1118

Head Matter:
Charles Lenny PURVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 97-2225.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
July 27, 1998.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; Judith Dougherty Hall, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; Denise 0. Simpson, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges his convictions and sentences on several grounds. We find that one has merit, and we reverse and remand for a new trial. The trial court failed to conduct a full inquiry and to make the required findings when the state committed a discovery violation by calling a witness not disclosed on their witness list. See Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771, 775 (Fla.1971); Hatcher v. State, 568 So.2d 472, 474 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), rev. denied, 577 So.2d 1328 (Fla.1991). We are unable to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the discovery violation and the trial court's failure to conduct a full inquiry did not prejudice the defense. We are, therefore, required to reverse. See State v. Schopp, 653 So.2d 1016, 1020-1021 (Fla.1995).
MINER, WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur.