Criminal Court: CRIMINAL LAW – Statute of Limitations –
trial court did not err in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss based on
failure of State to prosecute second-degree misdemeanor theft charge within
one year – five-year statute of limitations provided for by section 812.035(10)
does not apply to misdemeanor offenses – doctrine of stare decisis compels
appellate court to rely on its previous decision – Order affirmed. State v. Townsend, No. 03-00052APANO
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
vs. APPELLATE NO: CRC03-00052APANO
LOWER COURT NO: CTC99-32475MMANO
BEVERLY J. TOWNSEND,
Opinion issued March _______, 2004.
Appeal from a decision of the County Court.
Judge Sonny Im.
Theodora Christopher, Assistant State Attorney,
Counsel for Appellant.
Joy Goodyear, Assistant Public Defender,
Counsel for Appellee.
The State of
A review of case law reflects that section 812.035(10) supersedes section 775.15 with respect to felony offenses. See e.g., State v. Bare, 473 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Both parties to this appeal concede that there is no case law applying section 812.035(10) to misdemeanor offenses.
This court has previously addressed this very issue. In State v. Telesz, CRC02-21251CFANO (Fla. Pinellas Cty Ct. Sep. 12, 2003), this court reasoned that section 812.035(10) does not apply to misdemeanor offenses. This court’s decision in Telesz was based in part on prior decisions from other circuit courts.
Although the State has
since appealed this court’s decision in Telesz to the Second District
Court of Appeal (2D03-4609), and although that court appears to be reviewing
the issue under its certiorari jurisdiction, the doctrine of stare decisis
compels us to rely on our previous decision.
Perez v. State, 620 So. 2d 1256, 1267 (
DONE AND ORDERED this ______ day of March, 2004.
DAVID A. DEMERS, Circuit Judge
ROBERT J. MORRIS, JR., Circuit Judge
IRENE SULLIVAN, Circuit Judge