Hunter v. State
The Fifth DCA reversed a conviction, holding that the defendant was entitled to permanent discharge because the trial court miscalculated the 10-day speedy-trial recapture period under Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.514 by excluding weekends, causing trial to begin two days late. The court also held the defendant substantially complied with the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) despite not serving the court directly, triggering the 180-day IAD deadline, and that his post-expiration agreement to a trial date and continuance request did not waive his speedy-trial/IAD rights under the Nelson/Ryan nullity-rule analysis because the State's late trial, not the defendant's actions, was the principal cause of the delay.
Key facts
- Hunter was charged with a crime and tried in the trial court, which set a 10-day speedy-trial recapture period but miscalculated it by excluding weekends, causing trial to begin two days outside the recapture window.
- Hunter had previously made a request under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) without serving the court directly, but the State had actual knowledge of the request; he later agreed to a trial date after the recapture period expired.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion provides a detailed, practitioner-useful roadmap for litigating IAD and Rule 3.191 recapture-period disputes, including reaffirming that substantial (not strict) compliance suffices to trigger IAD deadlines… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.