459 So. 2d 470 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1984
Lead Opinion
Appellant, a prison inmate, was accused of assaulting a fellow inmate with a knife, given Miranda warnings, questioned concerning the incident and placed in administrative detention. Three months later, the appellant was charged with aggravated battery and possession of a weapon by a State prisoner. Appellant moved for discharge of the information alleging that his right to a speedy trial, pursuant to Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.191(a)(1) had been violated as more than 180 days had passed since he was placed in administrative confinement. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm.
The appellant contends that placement in administrative confinement as a result of
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
I dissent and would reverse based on my conclusion that the administrative confinement in this case resulted solely from the conduct giving rise to charges filed more than 180 days after appellant was “miran-dized,” interrogated, and custodially segregated from the inmate population. See concurring opinion of Judge Ervin in Lynn v. State, 436 So.2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).