From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McIntosh v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Nov 14, 1986
496 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 1986)

Summary

In McIntosh, the trial court ruled that a minor witness was incompetent to testify against the defendant, and suppressed the witness's testimony.

Summary of this case from State v. Arriagada

Opinion

No. 67819.

August 21, 1986. Rehearing Denied November 14, 1986.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, John E. Born, J.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender and Jeffrey L. Anderson, Asst. Public Defender, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, for petitioner.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Robert S. Jaegers, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.


We have for review State v. McIntosh, 475 So.2d 973 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), which directly and expressly conflicts with this Court's decisions in Jones v. State, 477 So.2d 566 (Fla. 1985), and State v. C.C., 476 So.2d 144 (Fla. 1985). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

The trial court entered a pretrial order holding that a minor witness was incompetent to testify against McIntosh which the state appealed. The district court determined that the state had no direct right of appeal, treated the appeal as a petition for certiorari, and overturned the order.

McIntosh contends that because the district court found that the state had no right to directly appeal the pretrial order, it was without authority to afford review by way of certiorari. We agree.

Whether the district court's determination in this regard is correct is not before us.

In C.C., 476 So.2d at 146, we held that the state is entitled to interlocutory review only in those cases where an appeal may be taken as a matter of right. In State v. G.P., 476 So.2d 1272 (Fla. 1985), we held that no right of review by certiorari exists in the absence of a right of appeal. See also Jones, 477 So.2d at 566 (appellate court cannot afford review to the state by way of certiorari when the state has no statutory or other cognizable right to appeal the judgment sought to be reviewed).

Accordingly, we quash the decision below on the authority of C.C., G.P., and Jones.

It is so ordered.

McDONALD, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

McIntosh v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Nov 14, 1986
496 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 1986)

In McIntosh, the trial court ruled that a minor witness was incompetent to testify against the defendant, and suppressed the witness's testimony.

Summary of this case from State v. Arriagada

In McIntosh v. State, 496 So.2d 120 (Fla. 1986), the supreme court recently held in no uncertain terms that the state cannot obtain certiorari in cases where it has no specific right of appeal. The court said: "... because the district court found that the state had no right to directly appeal the pretrial order, it was without authority to afford review by way of certiorari."

Summary of this case from Adams v. State, ex Rel. Eagan
Case details for

McIntosh v. State

Case Details

Full title:JOHN McINTOSH, PETITIONER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Nov 14, 1986

Citations

496 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 1986)

Citing Cases

Tualla v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.

“The principle is well settled that a child's competency is fixed when he or she is offered as a witness,…

State v. Magrath

A direct appeal by the state, therefore, will not lie. Nor can this court allow certiorari. McIntosh v.…