C o u r t R u l e s
Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure can be found at the following website:
Court Rules regarding the 20th Judicial Circuit - Lee, Collier, Charlotte, Glades, and Hendry - can be found here: http://www.ca.cjis20.org/home/main/rules.asp
Further, I have provided some of the rules that are relevant to DUI's below for your convenience.
V. PRETRIAL MOTIONS AND DEFENSES RULE 3.190. PRETRIAL MOTIONS
(a) In General. Every pretrial motion and pleading in response to a motion shall be in writing and signed by the party making the motion or the attorney for the party. This requirement may be waived by the court for good cause shown. Each motion or other pleading shall state the ground or grounds on which it is based. A copy shall be served on the adverse party. A certificate of service must accompany the filing of any pleading.
(b) Motion to Dismiss; Grounds. All defenses available to a defendant by plea, other than not guilty, shall be made only by motion to dismiss the indictment or information, whether the same shall relate to matters of form, substance, former acquittal, former jeopardy, or any other defense.
(c) Time for Moving to Dismiss. Unless the court grants further time, the defendant shall move to dismiss the indictment or information either before or at arraignment. The court in its discretion may permit the defendant to plead and thereafter to file a motion to dismiss at a time to be set by the court. Except for objections based on fundamental grounds, every ground for a motion to dismiss that is not presented by a motion to dismiss within the time hereinabove provided shall be considered waived. However, the court may at any time entertain a motion to dismiss on any of the following grounds:
(1) The defendant is charged with an offense for which the defendant has been pardoned.
(2) The defendant is charged with an offense for which the defendant previously has been placed in jeopardy.
(3) The defendant is charged with an offense for which the defendant previously has been granted immunity.
(4) There are no material disputed facts and the undisputed facts do not establish a prima facie case of guilt against the defendant.
The facts on which the motion is based should be alleged specifically and the motion sworn to.
(d) Traverse or Demurrer. The state may traverse or demur to a motion to dismiss that alleges factual matters. Factual matters alleged in a motion to dismiss under subdivision (c)(4) of this rule shall be considered admitted unless specifically denied by the state in the traverse. The court may receive evidence on any issue of fact necessary to the decision on the motion. A motion to dismiss under subdivision (c)(4) of this rule shall be denied if the state files a traverse that, with specificity, denies under oath the material fact or facts alleged in the motion to dismiss. The demurrer or traverse shall be filed a reasonable time before the hearing on the motion to dismiss.
(e) Effect of Sustaining a Motion to Dismiss. If the motion to dismiss is sustained, the court may order that the defendant be held in custody or admitted to bail for a reasonable specified time pending the filing of a new indictment or information. If a new indictment or information is not filed within the time specified in the order, or within such additional time as the court may allow for good cause shown, the defendant, if in custody, shall be discharged therefrom, unless some other charge justifies a continuation in custody. If the defendant has been released on bail, the defendant and the sureties shall be exonerated; if money or bonds have been deposited as bail, the money or bonds shall be refunded.
July 29, 2015 Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure
The types of disputes that can be brought before a court are commonly laid down by statute. Court rules, some of them explicitly set out in codes issued by the court and others established by precedent, set other limits on when disputes can be brought before the court and how. Generally, controversies must be justiciable. A controversy is not justiciable if it predominantly involves a political question; the answer to which should really be left to the legislative or executive branch. Additionally, courts will generally not decide cases that are not ripe -- that is, what is actually in controversy has not yet become concrete.
Courts of general jurisdiction have the power to hear claims as long as there is a controversy among parties with diverse interests and conflicting claims. There are additional requirements placed on the controversy depending on what type of court the claim is filed in. Not all claims can be filed in all courts. Each court has certain defined jurisdiction and categories of disputes may be excluded because of the amount at stake. For instance, in federal courts, if jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship, the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000. (See 28 U.S.C. § 1332).
RULE 6.110. DRIVER IMPROVEMENT, STUDENT TRAFFIC SAFETY COUNCIL, AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE
EDUCATION COURSES
(a) Designation of School. In those areas where defendants are ordered or are allowed to elect to attend a driver improvement school or student traffic safety council school, or are sentenced to a substance abuse education course, the chief judge of the circuit shall issue an administrative order designating the schools at which attendance is required. No substance abuse education course shall be approved by the chief judges until approval is first granted by the DUI Programs Director. For persons ordered to attend driver improvement schools, those schools approved by the department shall be considered approved for purposes of this rule.
(b) Inspection and Supervision. Any programs designated to serve an area of the state are subject to the inspection and supervision of the DUI Programs Director.
(c) Out-of-State Residents. Out-of-state residents sentenced to a driver improvement school course or substance abuse program may elect to complete a substantially similar program or school in their home state, province, or country.
Committee Notes
1988 Amendment. The reason for the change was to bring subdivision (a) into conformity with the statutory language in section 322.282, Florida Statutes, which states “substance abuse education course” rather than a “DWI Counter Attack School.”
Subdivision (c) is new and was designed to allow compliance with section 316.193(5), Florida Statutes, when the person did not reside in Florida, was in Florida for only a short, temporary stay, and attendance at a substance abuse course in Florida would constitute a hardship. Section 316.193(5) requires only that the substance abuse course be “specified by the court.”
1990 Amendment. The offense of Driving While Intoxicated was abolished by statute, thereby making reference to DWI inappropriate. The title of the person coordinating Substance Abuse Education Courses has been changed from that of Schools Coordinator to that of Programs Director.
March 5, 2015 Florida Rules of Traffic Court 9
RULE 6.130. CASE CONSOLIDATION
When a defendant is cited for the commission of both a criminal and a civil traffic violation, or both a civil traffic infraction requiring a mandatory hearing and a civil traffic infraction not requiring a hearing, the cases may be heard simultaneously if they arose out of the same set of facts.
However, in no case shall a traffic hearing officer hear a criminal traffic case or a case involving a civil traffic infraction issued in conjunction with a criminal traffic offense.
Under any of these circumstances the civil traffic infraction shall be treated as continued for the purpose of reporting to the department. Prior to the date of the scheduled hearing or trial, a defendant may dispose of any nonmandatory civil traffic infraction in the manner provided by these rules and section 318.14, Florida Statutes.
Committee Notes
1990 Amendment. The rule on case consolidation was amended to include language from chapter 89-337, Laws of Florida, which prohibits traffic magistrates from hearing civil infractions arising out of same facts as criminal traffic offenses.
1996 Amendment. Enactment of chapter 94-202, Laws of Florida, necessitated the deletion of all references in the rules to traffic “magistrates” in favor of the term traffic “hearing officers.”
