A pre-trial order denying the defendant’s motion in limine
was not entitled to certiorari review because defendant failed to show an
appeal following any adverse trial verdict would not provide adequate relief. Petition
denied. Sarafian v. State, No. CRC 05-16 APANO, (
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF THE STATE OF
BERC SARAFIAN
Petitioner,
v. Case No. CRC 05-16 APANO
UCN522005AP000016XXXXCR
STATE OF
Respondent.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed __________________.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari
seeking review of a decision
of the
Acting County Judge David Seth Walker
John Trevena, Esq.
Attorney for petitioner
Theodora Christopher, Esq.
Assistant State Attorney
ORDER AND OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the petitioner, Berc Sarafian’s, Petition for Writ of Certiorari. After reviewing the briefs and record, this Court denies the Petition.
The
Petitioner is attempting to seek certiorari review of a non-final order which
denied his motion in limine. “An interlocutory pretrial order in a criminal
case excluding evidence is subject to certiorari review only when the order
departs from the essential requirements of the law and plenary appeal cannot
provide an adequate remedy.” State v. Veilleux, 859 So.2d 1224, 1227 (
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari is denied.
DONE
AND ORDERED in Chambers at
___________________________
Nancy Moate Ley
Circuit Judge
___________________________
R. Timothy Peters
Circuit Judge
___________________________
John A. Schaefer
Circuit Judge
cc: John Trevena, Esq.
State Attorney