State v. Morales
Docket: No. 96-2276
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; May 14, 1997; Florida; State Appellate Court
The trial court's order to dismiss the charges against Jonathan Morales for fraudulent use of a driver’s license was affirmed. Morales, along with Freddy Vilchez, was charged under section 322.212(6) of the Florida Statutes. Morales filed a sworn motion to dismiss, which, despite being unnumbered and in narrative form, asserted facts that, if undisputed, did not establish a prima facie case of guilt. The state's response was a two-paragraph traverse that failed to specifically deny the material facts from Morales’ motion, leading the trial judge to find it insufficient. According to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(d), factual claims in a motion to dismiss are deemed admitted unless specifically denied by the state. The state’s general denial of approximately 80% of the facts was inadequate, echoing issues identified in the precedent case State v. Kemp, which emphasized the need for specific denials. The court found that the state could have responded to each of Morales’ allegations, regardless of the format. The reliance on other cases, such as State v. Diaz and Branciforte v. State, was deemed misplaced as they did not address the specific deficiencies present in the state's traverse. Ultimately, the trial court correctly determined that the state did not establish a prima facie case against Morales, leading to the affirmation of the dismissal. Judges Stone and Warner concurred with the decision.