Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1987

State v. Mena

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided April 21, 1987 · Barkdull, Nesbitt, Pearson

505 So. 2d 681; 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1086; 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 7805 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Aronson (Florida Circuit Courts 1991)
State v. Matos (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
State v. Rojas (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s order dismissing the charges against the defendants is reversed upon the holdings that the State fulfilled its obligation to the defendants when it furnished them with the address of the informer whose name was already known to them, State v. Rodriguez, 483 So.2d 751 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); and, absent some showing that the State “either through calculated official ignorance or deliberate, intentional activity was at fault *682for the informer’s disappearance in this case, or for its failure to know the informer’s whereabouts,” Guzman v. State, 498 So.2d 639, 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), the State cannot be held responsible for the defendants’ inability to procure the informer as a defense witness at trial.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.