Case Name: THE FLORIDA BAR re EMERGENCY AMENDMENTS TO RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (RULE 3.220)
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1986-11-26
Citations: 498 So. 2d 875
Docket Number: Nos. 68269, 68270
Parties: THE FLORIDA BAR re EMERGENCY AMENDMENTS TO RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (RULE 3.220).
Judges: 
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 498
Pages: 875–876

Head Matter:
THE FLORIDA BAR re EMERGENCY AMENDMENTS TO RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (RULE 3.220).
Nos. 68269, 68270.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Nov. 26, 1986.
Joseph J. Reiter, President of The Florida Bar, West Palm Beach, Ray Ferrero, Jr., President-elect of The Florida Bar, Ft. Lauderdale, Michael L. Von Zamft, Chairman, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Philip W. Maniatty, Vice Chairman, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Miami, John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director and John A. Boggs, Director of Lawyer Regulation, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, and Arthur I. Jacobs, Gen. Counsel, Pros. Attys. Ass’n., Fernandino Beach, for petitioners.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The state attorneys of Florida petitioned this Court to appoint a commission to study and make recommendations with respect to discovery procedures in criminal proceedings. At that time, a subcommittee of the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee was conducting such a study. This Court subsequently ordered the Committee to submit its findings and recommendations to the Court.
The Committee has recommended that we amend Rule 3.220(d) by creating a subsection (1) in order to clarify the use of discovery depositions in cases involving multiple defendants. The Committee also recommended that we create Rule 3.220(d)(2) which limits the number of situations in which discovery depositions will be transcribed at public expense. The two proposed rule changes will save money without violating the rights of the accused. The proposed rules changes are unopposed and hereby adopted effective immediately upon the filing of this opinion.
It is so ordered.