Dimillo v. State

Summary

The court held that a defendant’s absence from a calendar call did not constitute unavailability for trial under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(e) when no order required the defendant’s attendance. It further held that a speedy-trial waiver executed to avoid arrest for nonattendance at such a hearing was a nullity. The judgment was reversed, and the defendant was discharged.

Holdings

1. A defendant's failure to attend a calendar call does not constitute unavailability for trial when no order requires the defendant's presence at the calendar call.
2. A speedy-trial waiver executed to avoid arrest for nonattendance at a calendar call that did not require the defendant's presence is a nullity.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant's absence from a calendar call constitutes unavailability for trial under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(e) when no order requires the defendant's presence.
2. Whether a speedy-trial waiver executed to avoid arrest for nonattendance at a hearing that did not require the defendant's presence is valid.

Disposition

reversed