Court Opinion

ID: 7510600
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 04:38:57.371255+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:23:24.455210
License: Public Domain

MOORE, Judge,
concurring specially:
I concur in the result here only because of Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771 (Fla.1971) and its progeny. However, it seems ludicrous to me to promulgate a rule which makes a discovery violation prejudical error, per se, in the absence of a Richardson inquiry. This is no more apparent than here where the violation concerns failure to disclose an oral statement made by the appellant and a search of the appellant’s person. If appellant and his counsel were conversing with each other, I would assume counsel knew about these matters. Thus, the error, if any, would be harmless.