Johanson v. State, 872 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). · Go Syfert
Search
Johanson v. State, 872 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“we agree with appellant that the circuit court erred in not conducting an evidentiary hearing, including an in-camera inspection of the state attorney's file, on the contested issue of whether the state had the requested reports in its possession.”
8 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Parish v. State (fladistctapp, 2011-05-11)
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Parish v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
we agree with appellant that the circuit court erred in not conducting an evidentiary hearing, including an in-camera inspection of the state attorney's file, on the contested issue of whether the state had the requested reports in its possession.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hollis v. Massa
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Def.’s Office, Second Judicial Circuit of Fla., 171 So.3d 744, 744 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (holding that the trial court erred in not conducting an evidentiary hearing on the contested issue of whether the Public Defender’s Office had the requested materials in its possession, despite the Public Defender’s Office’s unsworn response to the mandamus petition arguing that it did not possess some of the requested materials and that it had provided copies of the requested materials that were in its possession); see also Brown v. State, 152 So.3d 739, 740 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“Brown II”) (�…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Degregorio v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
See Radford v. Brock, 914 So.2d 1066, 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (explaining that “[i]f the petition and answer to the alternative writ raise disputed factual issues, the circuit court must resolve these issues upon evidence submitted by the parties” and reversing where the parties disputed whether the respondents actually possessed the requested records); Williams v. State, 163 So.3d 618, 620 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (reversing denial of mandamus petition when the response to the alternative writ did not resolve the factual issues alleged in the petition); Perez v. State, 980 So.2d 1205, 1206 (Fl…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ferrier v. Public Defender's Office, Second Judicial Circuit of Florida
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Bd., 144 So.3d 708, 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (reversing the dismissal of a petition for writ of mandamus based on a response that the School Board had already turned over the documents, the documents did not exist in the formant requested, or the documents did not exist and remanding for an evidentiary hearing); Johanson v. State, 872 So.2d 387, 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (reversing the denial of a petition for writ of mandamus based on an unsworn response filed by the State that it did not possess the records requested and remanding for an evidentiary hearing, including an in camera inspection of…
discussed Cited "see" Clay County Education Ass'n v. Clay County School Board
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Jo-hanson v. State, 872 So.2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (reversing the denial of a petition for writ of mandamus based on an unsworn response filed by the State that it did not possess the records requested and remanding to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing, including an in camera inspection of the state attorney’s file, to determine who possessed the required records); Radford v. Brock, 914 So.2d 1066, 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (reversing the dismissal of a mandamus action because the petition and answer raised a factual dispute as to who possessed the requested recording and stati…
Mikael JOHANSON
v.
STATE of Florida
No. 4D02-3785.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Apr 28, 2004.
872 So. 2d 387
Michael D. Gelety, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant., Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, Richard Valuntas, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Gross, Stone, Warner.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING/CLARIFICATION

PER CURIAM.

We grant the motion for rehearing, withdraw our previously issued opinion, and substitute the following.

This is an appeal from the circuit court’s denial of appellant’s petition for writ of mandamus compelling the state attorney’s office to comply with appellant’s public records request.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery. The information charged that the victim had suffered “great bodily harm, permanent disability or permanent disfigurement” caused by appellant “throwing a cup of bleach in his eyes.”

Appellant filed a public records request with the state attorney’s office seeking lab reports and medical records regarding the victim’s injury. Appellant’s request noted that the state’s discovery response in the criminal case listed lab reports and medical records.

The state’s unsworn response to the mandamus petition conceded that its discovery submission listed Dr. Lieberman of the Coral Springs Medical Center and “lab report, medical report(s), lab report, as mentioned in the police reports.” The response indicated that the assistant state attorney who had prepared the discovery submission reviewed her office’s file and did not find any lab or medical reports. The state argued that it did not possess the requested records and that the mandamus petition should be denied. The circuit court adopted the state’s response and denied the motion.

We agree with appellant that the circuit court erred in not conducting an evidentia-ry hearing, including an in-camera inspection of the state attorney’s file, on the contested issue of whether the state had the requested reports in its possession.

At the hearing, the trial court may consider and rule on arguments that the records are covered by exemptions from disclosure.

Reversed and remanded for an eviden-tiary hearing.

STONE, WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.