Forrest v. State
Forrest v. State
Opinion of the Court
We find no error in the failure of the trial court to hold a hearing pursuant to Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771 (Fla. 1971), because the record demonstrates that the state furnished the ballistics reports at issue to the defense prior to trial, so there was no discovery violation.
We also reject appellant’s argument that reversal is required due to the trial court’s denial of an ore tenus motion for disqualification.
Affirmed.
. Although defense counsel asked the court to recuse itself, he actually made a motion for disqualification. Recusal is the process by which a trial court voluntarily removes itself, while disqualification is the process by which a party seeks to remove a judge from the case.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Mathew Antwon FORREST v. STATE of Florida
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published