Mickens v. State, 773 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). · Go Syfert
Search
Mickens v. State, 773 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Goode (fla, 2002-10-17)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) State v. Goode (3×) also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. · 2002 · confidence medium
See Kinder v. State, 779 So.2d 512, 515 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (mandatory); State v. Osborne, 781 So.2d 1137, 1138 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (directory); State v. Reese, 773 So.2d 655, 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (directory).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Osborne (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
In State v. Reese, 773 So.2d 655, 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) the First District specifically held that, since under the express terms of the Act the time of commencement of trial may be extended for good cause, the statutory thirty-day time limitation is directory and does not establish a procedural bar so as to divest the trial court of jurisdiction to proceed.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rodney MICKENS
v.
STATE of Florida
No. 4D00-617.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Dec 20, 2000.
773 So. 2d 655
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Paul E. Petillo, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant., Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Don M. Rogers, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Hazouri, Shahood, Stone.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
SHAHOOD, J.

Appellant, Rodney Mickens, appeals his conviction and sentence on the charge of driving while license revoked (habitual), in violation of section 322.34(5), Florida Statutes, punishable as a third degree felony following a non-jury trial.

Appellee, State of Florida, concedes, and we agree, that this conviction must be reversed and remanded for a new trial. The record in this case neither contains a written waiver of a jury trial nor does it reflect that the trial court conducted an oral inquiry as to whether appellant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to a jury trial. See Tucker v. State, 559 So.2d 218 (Fla.1990); Hyler v. State, 732 So.2d 1208 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Sinkfield v. State, 681 So.2d 838 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

Finding no error in the other issues raised by appellant in this appeal, we affirm as to those issues.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.

STONE and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.