WILLIAM PAUL DABBS v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 230 So. 3d 475

Dabbs appeals a Florida Fourth District decision related to a trial in Palm Beach County on a murder charge.
The court previously reversed, finding reversible error for a discovery violation at the start of the murder trial.
The State moved for rehearing arguing against that ruling and attempting to reframe the issue as non-prejudicial or non-violation based.
The rehearing motion sought to reargue merits rather than call attention to overlooked matters.
The panel denied the State’s rehearing request, reaffirming the existence of a discovery violation and the need for remedy, including potential mistrial remedy, while cautioning against using rehearing to reargue merits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by not granting a mistrial for discovery violations.	Dabbs contends the violation prejudiced the defense and warranted a mistrial.	State disputes prejudice or misstates the violation's impact.	No abuse of discretion; the State’s rehearing arguments do not alter the underlying ruling.
Whether the State’s motion for rehearing properly raised new arguments rather than rearguing the merits.	Dabbs argues rehearing cannot introduce new issues.	State attempts to reargue merits under the guise of rehearing.	Rehearing denied; motion cannot be used to reargue merits.

Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980) (abuse of discretion standard for trial court rulings on discovery)
Huffman v. State, 472 So.2d 469 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (discovery issues and procedural prejudice considerations)
Ayer v. Bush, 775 So.2d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (new issues cannot be raised for first time in rehearing)
Whipple v. State, 431 So.2d 1011 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (rehearing not vehicle to reargue merits)
Reitzes (Lawyers Title Ins. Corp. v. Reitzes), 631 So.2d 1100 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (motion for rehearing should be limited to overlooked points)