Opinion
No. SC15–177.
10-29-2015
In re AMENDMENTS TO the FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.
Meredith Charbula, Chair, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Jacksonville, FL; Judge Samantha Lee Ward, Past Chair, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Tampa, FL; John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, and Heather Savage Telfer, Bar Staff Liaison, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, FL, for Petitioner. Arthur Ivan Jacobs, General Counsel, Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, Fernandina Beach, FL; Alan S. Johnson, Chief Assistant State Attorney, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, FL; Robert Blaise Trettis, Public Defender, Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, Viera, FL; Julianne M. Holt, Public Defender, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Tampa, FL; Rebecca A. Sharpless, Litigation Committee Co–Chair, American Immigration Lawyers Association, South Florida Chapter, Coral Gables, FL; Jacob Lawrence Ratzan, President, American Immigration Lawyers Association, South Florida Chapter, Miami, FL; Carlos Jesus Martinez, Public Defender, John Eddy Morrison, Assistant Public Defender, and Jonathan Harris Greenberg, Assistant Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami, FL; Luke Newman of Luke Newman, PA, Tallahassee, FL; and William Rudolf Ponall of Snure & Ponall P.A., Winter Park, FL, Responding with Comments.
Meredith Charbula, Chair, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Jacksonville, FL; Judge Samantha Lee Ward, Past Chair, Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, Tampa, FL; John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, and Heather Savage Telfer, Bar Staff Liaison, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, FL, for Petitioner.
Arthur Ivan Jacobs, General Counsel, Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, Fernandina Beach, FL; Alan S. Johnson, Chief Assistant State Attorney, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, FL; Robert Blaise Trettis, Public Defender, Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, Viera, FL; Julianne M. Holt, Public Defender, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, Tampa, FL; Rebecca A. Sharpless, Litigation Committee Co–Chair, American Immigration Lawyers Association, South Florida Chapter, Coral Gables, FL; Jacob Lawrence Ratzan, President, American Immigration Lawyers Association, South Florida Chapter, Miami, FL; Carlos Jesus Martinez, Public Defender, John Eddy Morrison, Assistant Public Defender, and Jonathan Harris Greenberg, Assistant Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami, FL; Luke Newman of Luke Newman, PA, Tallahassee, FL; and William Rudolf Ponall of Snure & Ponall P.A., Winter Park, FL, Responding with Comments.
PER CURIAM.
This matter is before the Court for consideration of the regular-cycle report of proposed amendments to the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure filed by The Florida Bar's Criminal Procedure Rules Committee (Committee). See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.140(b). We have jurisdiction and adopt the amendments as discussed below.
See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.
BACKGROUND
The Committee proposes amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.112 (Minimum Standards for Attorneys in Capital Cases), 3.121(a) (Arrest Warrant (Issuance)), 3.172(c) (Acceptance of Guilty or Nolo Contendere Plea (Determination of Voluntariness)), 3.192 (Motions for Rehearing), 3.212(d) (Competence to Proceed: Hearing and Disposition (Release on Finding of Incompetence)), 3.220 (Discovery), 3.281 (List of Prospective Jurors), 3.300(d) (Voir Dire Examination, Oath, and Excusing of Member (Juror Voir Dire Questionnaires)), 3.410 (Jury Request to Review Evidence or for Additional Instructions), 3.590(a) (Time for and Method of Making Motions; Procedure; Custody Pending Hearing (Time for Filing in Noncapital Cases)), 3.984 (Application for Criminal Indigent Status), 3.985 (Standard Jury Instructions), and 3.986 (Forms Related to Judgment and Sentence). As required by rule 2.140(b)(2), the Committee published the proposals in The Florida Bar News before filing its report with the Court. Numerous comments were received by the Committee. The Board of Governors of The Florida Bar unanimously approved the Committee's proposals. The Court also published the proposals for comment. Eight comments were received pertaining to the proposals to amend rules 3.112, 3.172(c), and 3.220, to which the Committee responded.
Having considered the Committee's proposals, the comments filed, and the response to the comments, we adopt the Committee's proposals to amend rules 3.121(a), 3.192, 3.212(d), 3.220, 3.410, 3.590(a), 3.984, and 3.986 as proposed. The proposals to amend rules 3.112 and 3.172 are adopted with modifications, while we reject the proposals to amend rules 3.281, 3.300(d), and 3.985.
AMENDMENTS
The amendments to the rules are discussed below.
Minor, technical changes to the rules are not elaborated upon.
The Court adopts the proposal to amend rule 3.112, except with respect to subdivision (f) of rule 3.112 (Minimum Standards for Attorneys in Capital Cases (Lead Trial Counsel)). In subdivision (f), the Court rejects the proposal to remove the word “defense” from the term “lead defense counsel.” In In re Amendment to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure–Rule 3.112 Minimum Standards for Attorneys in Capital Cases, 759 So.2d 610, 611 (Fla.1999), the Court took “an important step in ensuring the integrity of the judicial process in capital cases by adopting a rule of criminal procedure to help ensure that competent representation will be provided to indigent capital defendants in all cases.” The Court advanced that goal when it extended rule 3.112 to apply to public defenders and private counsel, while rejecting a “grandfather clause” that would have allowed attorneys who did not meet the new requirements but who had previously handled capital cases to continue representing capital defendants. In re Amend. to Fla. Rules of Crim. Pro.–Rule 3.112 Minimum Standards for Attorneys in Capital Cases, 820 So.2d 185, 186–87, 192 (Fla.2002). To remove “defense” from “lead defense counsel” in order to permit prosecutors to substitute prior capital trial prosecution experience for experience as defense counsel so that they may participate as lead defense counsel in capital cases is contrary to the goals in adopting rule 3.112, and fails to account for the differences in the roles of prosecutors and defense attorneys.
Rule 3.121 (Arrest Warrant) is amended in two regards. First, subdivision (a)(4), which requires that the arrest warrant specify the name of the person to be arrested, is amended to require a photograph of the individual if one is available. Second, subdivision (a)(7), which pertains to bailable offenses, is amended to require not only the amount of bail, but also “other conditions of release.”
Rule 3.172(c) (Acceptance of Guilty or Nolo Contendere Plea (Determination of Voluntariness)) includes a number of amendments. First, the trial judge is required, when determining voluntariness, to place the defendant under oath, address him or her personally, and determine on the record that he or she understands certain rights. Second, those rights are now set out individually with headings, which include the following: “Nature of the Charge,” “Right to Representation,” “Right to Trial by Jury and Attendant Rights,” “Effect of Plea,” “Waiving Right to Trial,” “Questioning by Judge,” “Terms of Plea Agreement,” “Deportation Consequences,” “Sexually Violent or Sexually Motivated Offenses,” and “Driver's License Suspension or Revocation.” The Court rejects the Committee's proposal to label subdivision (c)(8) as “Immigration Consequences,” and to include in that subdivision consequences that exceed deportation. Instead, subdivision (c)(8) is designated “Deportation Consequences,” and includes various requirements placed on the lower court accepting a guilty or nolo contendere plea when deportation may be a consequence of said plea. These amendments follow the United States Supreme Court's decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), and this Court's decision in Hernandez v. State, 124 So.3d 757 (Fla.2012), each pertaining to ineffective assistance of trial counsel with respect to whether counsel has a duty to advise his or her client whether an offense to which he or she is pleading guilty would subject the client to deportation. Rule 3.192 (Motions for Rehearing) is amended to add a reference to rule 3.801 (Correction of Jail Credit) as another of the postconviction proceedings to which the rule does not apply.
In rule 3.212(d) (Competence to Proceed: Hearing and Disposition (Release on Finding of Incompetence)), the phrase “for a period not to exceed 1 year” is deleted in order that the circuit court will retain jurisdiction to allow for the repeated process of reexamination of mental competency and the setting of the same or new conditional release conditions where the defendant is found to not be mentally competent and does not meet the criteria for commitment.
The Court amends rule 3.220(h)(1) (Discovery (Discovery Depositions; Generally)) by deleting the phrase “except a subpoena duces tecum” to remove the distinction between the criminal and civil discovery rules with respect to the procedure for taking depositions.
Rule 3.410 (Jury Request to Review Evidence or for Additional Instructions) is amended in light of this Court's decision in Hazuri v. State, 91 So.3d 836 (Fla.2012). In Hazuri, the Court held that after a jury request for trial transcripts during deliberations at trial, the trial court is required to inform the jury that it has a right to request a read-back of testimony and that the jury should clarify which portion of the testimony it wants to review. The addition of subdivision (b), which sets out the procedures the trial judge is to follow when the jury requests to have the transcripts of trial testimony, is added in response to the Hazuri decision. Finally, new subdivision (c) requires that the read-back of transcripts be conducted consistent with subdivision (a).
In rule 3.590(a) (Time for and Method of Making Motions; Procedure; Custody Pending Hearing (Time for Filing in Noncapital Cases)), the phrase “in cases in which the state does not seek the death penalty” is moved to the beginning of the rule to clarify when the rule applies. In addition, the rule is amended to reflect that the motion for new trial or in arrest of judgment may be made either orally in open court or in writing and filed with the clerk's office.
With regard to rule 3.984 (Application for Criminal Indigent Status), the form is amended to conform to the minimization requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.425 (Minimization of the Filing of Sensitive Information), to require only the last four digits of a driver's license or identification number.
The Court also amends rule 3.986 (Forms Related to Judgment and Sentence) to conform to the minimization requirements of rule 2.425, to replace the victim's phone number with that of the prosecuting attorney, the victim's attorney, or the victim advocate, under the section for “Restitution Order.”
Finally, the Court declines to amend certain proposals advanced by the Committee, including the proposed amendments to rules 3.281, 3.300(d), and 3.985.
The Court rejects the Committee's proposal to amend rule 3.281 (List of Prospective Jurors) by removing disclosure of copies of all jury questionnaires returned by prospective jurors. The rule applies to the parties, providing in pertinent part as follows: “Upon request, any party shall be furnished by the clerk of the court with a list containing names and addresses of prospective jurors summoned to try the case together with copies of all jury questionnaires returned by the prospective jurors.” Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.281 (emphasis added). Excluding the jury questionnaires ignores the fact that the parties use the juror questionnaires in making decisions as to which prospective jurors to strike and which ones to retain on the jury. Cf. Fla. R. Civ. P.—S.V.P. 4.431(b) (Trial by Jury, Questionnaire) (“The circuit court may require prospective jurors to complete a questionnaire in the form approved by the Supreme Court of Florida to assist in selecting prospective jurors....”). Finally, the Committee's proposal does not pertain to the minimization of sensitive information to be provided, but instead seeks to make the jury questionnaires confidential rather than minimizing sensitive information contained therein. This Court cannot make judicial branch records confidential and exempt from public access by rule adopted after the 1992 adoption of Article I, section 24, of the Florida Constitution (Access to public records and meetings). For this same reason, the Committee's proposal to amend rule 3.300(d) (Voir Dire Examination, Oath, and Excusing of Member (Juror Voir Dire Questionnaires)), requiring the filing under seal of juror questionnaires, is rejected.
Article I, section 24, of the Florida Constitution, “Access to public records and meetings,” which was adopted in November 1992 and became effective July 1, 1993, provides in pertinent part as follows:
(a) Every person has the right to inspect or copy any public record made or received in connection with the official business of any public body, officer, or employee of the state, or persons acting on their behalf, except with respect to records exempted pursuant to this section or specifically made confidential by this Constitution. This section specifically includes the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government and each agency or department created thereunder; counties, municipalities, and districts; and each constitutional officer, board, and commission, or entity created pursuant to law or this Constitution.
....
(c) This section shall be self-executing. The legislature, however, may provide by general law passed by a two-thirds vote of each house for the exemption of records from the requirements of subsection (a) ... provided that such law shall state with specificity the public necessity justifying the exemption and shall be no broader than necessary to accomplish the stated purpose of the law....
(d) All laws that are in effect on July 1, 1993 that limit public access to records or meetings shall remain in force, and such laws apply to records of the legislative and judicial branches, until they are repealed. Rules of court that are in effect on the date of adoption of this section that limit access to records shall remain in effect until they are repealed.
Art. I, § 24, Fla. Const. (emphasis added).
Lastly, the Court declines to amend rule 3.985 (Standard Jury Instructions) to change the web address to the Court's Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases. The URL as provided in rule 3.985 is the address adopted by the Court in In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.172 and 3.985 and Amendments to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.985, 20 So.3d 376, 378 (Fla.2009), and is the same web address listed in rule 3.985 in West's Florida Rules of Court (2015).
The error in the web address included in rule 3.985 is as reported by Westlaw.com and Westlawnext.com.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, we amend the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure as reflected in the appendix to this opinion. New language is indicated by underscoring; deletions are indicated by struck-through type. The amendments shall become effective January 1, 2016, at 12:02 a.m.
It is so ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, and PERRY, JJ., concur. APPENDIX
RULE 3.112. MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR ATTORNEYS IN CAPITAL CASES
(a)-(d) [No change]
(e) Appointment of Counsel. A court must appoint lead counsel and, upon written application and a showing of need by lead counsel, should appoint co-counsel to handle every capital trial in which the defendant is not represented by retained counsel. Lead counsel shall have the right to select co-counsel from attorneys on the lead counsel or co- counsel list. Both attorneys shall be reasonably compensated for the trial and sentencing phase. Except under extraordinary circumstances, only one attorney may be compensated for other proceedings. In capital cases in which the Public Defender or Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel is appointed, the Public Defender or Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel shall designate lead and co-counsel.
(f) Lead Trial Counsel. Lead trial counsel assignments should be given to attorneys who:
(1)-(2) [No change]
(3) have prior experience as lead counsel in no fewer than nine state or federal jury trials of serious and complex cases which were tried to completion, as well as prior experience as lead defense counsel or co-counsel in at least two state or federal cases tried to completion in which the death penalty was sought. In addition, of the nine jury trials which were tried to completion, the attorney should have been lead counsel in at least three cases in which the charge was murder; or alternatively, of the nine jury trials, at least one was a murder trial and an additional five were felony jury trials; and
(4)-(7) [No change]
(e)–(l ) [No change]
Committee Comments
[No change]
Criminal Court Steering Committee Note
[No change]
RULE 3.121. ARREST WARRANT
(a) Issuance. An arrest warrant, when issued, shall:
(1)-(3) [No change]
(4) specify the name of the person to be arrested or, if the name is unknown to the judge, designate the person by any name or description by which the person can be identified with reasonable certainty, and include a photograph if reasonably available;
(5)-(6) [No change]
(7) for offenses where a right to bail exists, set the amount of bail or other conditions of release, and the return date.in all offenses bailable as of right be endorsed with the amount of bail
(a) [No change]
Committee Notes
[No change]
RULE 3.172. ACCEPTANCE OF GUILTY OR NOLO CONTENDERE PLEA
(a)–(b) [No change]
(c) Determination of Voluntariness. Except when a defendant is not present for a plea pursuant to the provisions of rule 3.180(d), the trial judge , must, when determining voluntariness, place the defendant under oath, should address the defendant personally and and shall determine on the record that he or she understands:shall
(1) Nature of the Charge. The nature of the charge to which the plea is offered, the maximum possible penalty, and any mandatory minimum penalty provided by lawt . ;
(2) Right to Representation. If not represented by an attorney, that the defendant has the right to be represented by an attorney at every stage of the proceeding and, if necessary, an attorney will be appointed to represent him or heri . ;
(3) Right to Trial By Jury and Attendant Rights. The right to plead not guilty or to persist in that plea if it has already been made, the right to be tried by a jury, and at that trial a defendant has the right to the assistance of counsel, the right to compel attendance of witnesses on his or her behalf, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him or her, and the right not to testify or be compelled to incriminate himself or herselft . ;
(4) Effect of Plea. Upon a plea of guilty, or nolo contendere without express reservation of the right to appeal, he or she gives up the right to appeal all matters relating to the judgment, including the issue of guilt or innocence, but does not impair the right to review by appropriate collateral attackthat u . ;
(5) Waiving Right to Trial. If the defendant pleads guilty or is adjudged guilty after a plea of nolo contendere there will not be a further trial of any kind, so that by pleading guilty or nolo contendere he or she waives the right to a trialthat i . ;
(6) Questioning by Judge. If the defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendere, the trial judge may ask the defendant questions about the offense to which he or she has pleaded, and if the defendant answers these questions under oath, on the record, and in the presence of counsel, the answers may later be used against him or her in a prosecution for perjurythat i . ;
(7) Terms of Plea Agreement. The complete terms of any plea agreement, including specifically all obligations the defendant will incur as a resultt . ;
(8) Deportation Consequences. that if he or she pleads guilty or nolo contendere, if he or she is not a United States citizen, the plea may subject him or her to deportation pursuant to the laws and regulations governing the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service. It shall not be necessary for the trial judge to inquire as to whether the defendant is a United States citizen, as this admonition shall be given to all defendants in all cases; and
(A) If the defendant is not a citizen of the United States, a finding of guilt by the court, and the court's acceptance of the defendant's plea of guilty or no contest, regardless of whether adjudication of guilt has been withheld, may have the additional consequence of changing his or her immigration status, including deportation or removal from the United States.
(B) The court should advise the defendant to consult with counsel if he or she needs additional information concerning the potential deportation consequences of the plea.
(C) If the defendant has not discussed the potential deportation consequences with his or her counsel, prior to accepting the defendant's plea, the court is required, upon request, to allow a reasonable amount of time to permit the defendant to consider the appropriateness of the plea in light of the advisement described in this section.
(D) This admonition should be given to all defendants in all cases, and the trial court must not require at the time of entering a plea that the defendant disclose
his or her legal status in the United States.
(9) Sexually Violent or Sexually Motivated Offenses. If the defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendere, and the offense to which the defendant is pleading is a sexually violent offense or a sexually motivated offense, or if the defendant has been previously convicted of such an offense, the plea may subject the defendant to involuntary civil commitment as a sexually violent predator upon completion of his or her sentence. It shall not be necessary for the trial judge to determine whether the present or prior offenses were sexually motivated, as this admonition shall be given to all defendants in all cases.thati
(10) Driver's License Suspension or Revocation. If the defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendre and the offense to which the defendant is pleading is one for which automatic, mandatory driver's license suspension or revocation is required by law to be imposed (either by the court or by a separate agency), the plea will provide the basis for the suspension or revocation of the defendant's driver's license.that i
(d)–(j) [No change]
Committee
1977 Adoption. [No Change]
2005 Amendment. [No Change]
2015 Amendment. In view of the holdings in Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010) and Hernandez v. State, 124 So.3d 757 (Fla.2012), the Committee felt it appropriate to expand the requirements in subdivision (c)(8).
RULE 3.192. MOTIONS FOR REHEARING
When an appeal by the state is authorized by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140, or sections 924.07 or 924.071, Florida Statutes, the state may file a motion for rehearing within 10 days of an order subject to appellate review. A motion for rehearing shall state with particularity the points of law or fact that, in the opinion of the state, the court has overlooked or misapprehended in its decision, and shall not present issues not previously raised in the proceeding. A response may be filed within 10 days of service of the motion. The trial court's order disposing of the motion for rehearing shall be filed within 15 days of the response but not later than 40 days from the date of the order of which rehearing is sought. If no order is filed within 40 days, the motion is deemed denied. A timely filed motion for rehearing shall toll rendition of the order subject to appellate review and the order shall be deemed rendered 40 days from the order of which rehearing is sought, or upon the filing of a written order denying the motion for rehearing, whichever is earlier. This rule shall not apply to postconviction proceedings pursuant to rule 3.800(a), 3.801, 3.850, 3.851, or 3.853. Nothing in this rule precludes the trial court from exercising its inherent authority to reconsider a ruling while the court has jurisdiction of the case.post-conviction
RULE 3.212. COMPETENCE TO PROCEED: HEARING AND DISPOSITION
(a)–(c) [No change]
(d) Release on Finding of Incompetence. If the court decides that a defendant is not mentally competent to proceed but does not meet the criteria for commitment, the defendant may be released on appropriate release The court may order that the defendant receive outpatient treatment at an appropriate local facility and that the defendant report conditions for a period not to exceed 1 year.
for further evaluation at specified times during the release period as conditions of release. A report shall be filed with the court after each evaluation by the persons appointed by the court to make such evaluations, with copies to all parties. The procedure for determinations of the confidential status of reports is governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420.
Committee Notes
[No change]
RULE 3.220. DISCOVERY
(a) [No change]
(b) Prosecutor's Discovery Obligation.
(1) Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state's possession or control, except that any property or material that portrays sexual performance by a child or constitutes child pornography may not be copied, photographed, duplicated, or otherwise reproduced so long as the state attorney makes the property or material reasonably available to the defendant or the defendant's attorney:
(A)-(I) [No change]
(J) reports or statements of experts made in connection with the particular case, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons; and
(K) any tangible papers or objects that the prosecuting attorney intends to use in the hearing or trial and that were not obtained from or that did not belong to the defendant ; .
(L) any tangible paper, objects or substances in the possession of law enforcement that could be tested for DNA ; and .
(M) [No change]
(2)-(4) [No change]
(c)-(g) [No change]
(h) Discovery Depositions.
(1) Generally. At any time after the filing of the charging document any party may take the deposition upon oral examination of any person authorized by this rule. A party taking a deposition shall give reasonable written notice to each other party and shall make a good faith effort to coordinate the date, time, and location of the deposition to accommodate the schedules of other parties and the witness to be deposed. The notice shall state the time and the location where the deposition is to be taken, the name of each person to be examined, and a certificate of counsel that a good faith effort was made to coordinate the deposition schedule. After notice to the parties the court may, for good cause shown, extend or shorten the time and may change the location of the deposition. Except as provided herein, the procedure for taking the deposition, including the scope of the examination, and the issuance of a subpoena for deposition by an attorney of record in the action, shall be the same as that provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Any deposition taken pursuant to this rule may be used by any party for the purpose of contradicting or impeaching the testimony of the deponent as a witness. The trial court or the clerk of the court may, upon application by a pro se litigant or the attorney for any party, issue subpoenas for the persons whose depositions are to be taken. In any case, including multiple defendants or consolidated cases, no person shall be deposed more than once except by consent of the (except a subpoena duces tecum)
parties or by order of the court issued on good cause shown. A witness who refuses to obey a duly served subpoena may be adjudged in contempt of the court from which the subpoena issued.
(A)-(D) [No change]
(2)–(8) [No change]
(i)–(o) [No change]
Committee Notes
[No change]
Court Commentary
[No change]
RULE 3.410. JURY REQUEST TO REVIEW EVIDENCE OR FOR ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
(a) If, after A they have retired to consider their verdict, jurors the jurors request additional instructions or to have any testimony read or played back to them they may be conducted into the courtroom by the officer who has them in charge and the court may give them the additional instructions or may order the testimony read or played back to them. The instructions shall be given and the testimony presented only after notice to the prosecuting attorney and to counsel for the defendant. All testimony read or played back must be done in open court in the presence of all parties. In its discretion, the court may respond in writing to the inquiry without having the jury brought before the court, provided the parties have received the opportunity to place objections on the record and both the inquiry and response are made part of the record.if they
(b) In a case in which the jury requests to have the transcripts of trial testimony, the following procedures must be followed:
(1) The trial judge must deny the requests for transcripts.
(2) The trial judge must instruct jurors that they can, however, request to have any testimony read or played back, which may or may not be granted at the court's discretion.
(3) In cases in which jurors make only a general request for transcripts, as opposed to identifying any particular witness' testimony that they wish to review, the trial judge must instruct jurors that, if they request a read or play back, they must specify the particular trial testimony they wish to have read or played back.
(c) If, after being properly instructed in accordance with subdivision (b), the jurors request a read or play back of any trial testimony, the trial judge must follow the procedures set forth in subdivision (a).
Committee Notes
[No Change]
RULE 3.590. TIME FOR AND METHOD OF MAKING MOTIONS; PROCEDURE; CUSTODY PENDING HEARING
(a) Time for Filing in Noncapital Cases. In cases in which the state does not seek the death penalty, a motion for new trial or in arrest of judgment, or bothA may be made, either orally in open court or in writing and filed with the clerk's office, within 10 days after the rendition of the verdict or the finding of the court. A timely motion may be amended to state new grounds without leave of court prior to expiration of the 10–day period and in the discretion of the court at any other time before the motion is determined., in cases in which the state does not seek the death penalty,
(b)–(e) [No change]
Committee
[No Change]
RULE 3.984. APPLICATION FOR CRIMINAL INDIGENT STATUS
Committee Note
1980 Amendment. The proposed changes to rule 3.986 are housekeeping in nature. References to the Department of Offender Rehabilitation have been changed to Department of Corrections to reflect a legislative change. See section 20.315, Florida Statutes (Supp.1978). The reference to “hard labor” has been stricken as the courts have consistently held such a condition of sentence is not authorized by statute. See, e.g., McDonald v. State, 321 So.2d 453, 458 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).