4D07-2772-State v. Hayes

State: Florida

Court: Florida Southern District Court

Docket No: 4D07-2772.op

Case Date: 12/03/2008

Plaintiff: 4D07-2772-State

Defendant: Hayes

Preview:DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
July Term 2008

STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL L. HAYES, Respondent. No. 4D07-2772 December 3, 2008 BARZEE FLORES, MARY, Associate Judge. The State appeals from a n order of th e trial court granting the defendant Michael Hayes's motion to disqualify the entire State Attorney's Office from the continued prosecution of this criminal case. Because we find that the trial court's order prohibiting the designated representative of the Executive Branch from prosecuting this criminal case is a departure from the essential requirements of law with no adequate remedy on appeal, we construe the State's appeal as a petition for certiorari, grant it and quash the order disqualifying the State Attorney's Office. Background Hayes was accused in two related multi-count informations with, generally, forgery, uttering a forged instrument, dealing in stolen property, and various counts of grand theft and extortion. The alleged victims are former attorney and now sitting county court judge Jerald D. Bryant and two of Bryant's former clients. The facts that give rise to the charges involve a period between 2003 and 2004 when Hayes worked for Bryant and a local Okeechobee church. The State alleges Hayes stole, forged and cashed checks from both and then left Bryant voicemail messages first apologizing for doing so and later threatening to make public embarrassing information he claimed to have about Bryant.

In October of 2005, defense counsel advised the court that he had negotiated a plea agreement with the State for a probationary sentence with restitution, a departure from the otherwise applicable guideline sentence, but that the parties needed more time to finalize the restitution amount. As it turned out, however, the assistant state attorney with whom he had been negotiating had by this time left the office and the newly assigned prosecutor would not agree to a probationary sentence. There was much contentious back and forth between the lawyers over whether or not an enforceable agreement had been reached and the trial judge repeatedly encouraged the parties to resolve the matter if they could. Finally, defense counsel announced that there was no agreement a n d that because he h a d detrimentally relied u p o n the original prosecutor's verbal agreement, he had conducted no discovery nor filed pretrial motions and was therefore not ready for trial. The case was continued. Hayes subsequently filed various motions including a motion to change venue wherein he argued, in part, that Jerald Bryant's position in the community

Download 4D07-2772.op.pdf