State v. Alain L. Gonzalez, 212 So. 3d 1094

Appellee (Gonzalez) was charged with leaving the scene of a crash involving injuries; the State filed an information without obtaining a sworn affidavit from the crash victim.
The State relied on the investigating officer’s affidavit, which described observed motorcycle damage and victim injuries, recorded the victim’s description of the other vehicle, located Gonzalez’s matching vehicle and damage, and included Gonzalez’s Miranda-advised confession.
Gonzalez moved to strike the information under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.140, arguing the only "material witness" was the victim and the lack of the victim’s sworn testimony required dismissal.
The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the information; the State appealed.
The Fifth District reversed, holding the officer’s affidavit supplied legally relevant and substantial sworn testimony and that the prosecutor acted in objective good faith in filing the information.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether rule 3.140 requires sworn testimony from the victim (a particular witness) before filing an information	The only material witness was the victim; without the victim’s sworn statement the information must be stricken	The officer’s sworn affidavit supplied material witness testimony (victim’s statement corroborated and independent officer observations), so filing was proper	The court held rule 3.140 requires sworn testimony from a witness (or witnesses) whose testimony is legally relevant and substantial; the officer’s affidavit met that standard and supported probable cause
Standard for judicial review of a motion to strike an information based on sufficiency of sworn testimony	The information should be dismissed if sworn testimony relied on is insufficient to establish elements	Courts should assess whether the prosecutor acted in good faith in relying on the sworn testimony, not reweigh evidence for sufficiency	The court held trial courts should decide whether a prosecutor acted in objective good faith; only when sworn testimony is so lacking that no reasonable prosecutor could act in good faith should dismissal follow

Murray v. State, 3 So. 3d 1108 (Fla. 2009) (charging documents should not be tested on evidentiary sufficiency; probable cause is the threshold)
State v. Weinberg, 780 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (officer affidavit based solely on secondhand hearsay insufficient; prosecutor lacked objective good faith)
Rodriguez v. State, 919 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 2005) (definition of “material witness” in judicial recusal context: testimony affecting merits and not duplicable)
Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359 (U.S. 1956) (an indictment based solely on hearsay is not subject to dismissal for insufficiency)