Motion for Leave to Take Deposition – DUI

COMES NOW the Defendant, by and through his undersigned attorney, pursuant to Rule 3.220(h)(1)(D), Fla. R. Crim. P., and respectfully moves the Court for an order permitting the deposition of a two witnesses, who are witnesses designated by the State as a Category A witnesses, and in support thereof, states as follows:

1. H. R. is 25 years of age.
2. He was arrested on October 17, and charged with driving under the influence (“DUI”).
3. Under traditional circumstances, when an individual is charged with DUI, he has the right to a formal review hearing, by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (“DMV”). This hearing serves the function of a discovery deposition.
4. However, due to the circumstances of this arrest (.000 BAC – urinalysis pending), the Defendant’s driver’s license is not suspended, and thus, there is no right to a DMV formal hearing.
5. Accordingly, under these unique circumstances, the Defendant has a bonafide need for discovery depositions.
6. The undersigned certifies this motion is filed in good faith.
7. Based upon review of the Arrest and Booking Report, Officers J. L. E., and J. T. F., are eye witnesses, and are relied upon by the State to support the charges in this case. As eye witnesses, Officers E and F qualify as Category A witnesses, pursuant to Rule 3.220(b)(1)(A)(I), Fla. R. Crim. P., and have been listed by the State as Category A witnesses.
8. Defendants are permitted to take the depositions of Category A witnesses without leave of court, as to any felony charges. Rule 3.220(h)(1)(A), Fla. R. Crim. P. Although these are misdemeanor charges, the rationale entitling a defendant to depose eye-witnesses has no less efficacy, simply because the incarceration exposure in a misdemeanor case is less than that of a felony.
9. The taking of depositions, where the sworn testimony of the witness can be obtained in a neutral environment, is a proper vehicle to insure the independence of the criminal justice system.
10. This deposition will not only permit the defendant fair discovery, and protect the defendant’s rights to Due Process and under the Confrontation Clause, but will afford the State an opportunity to better and more closely evaluate this case and determine if a trial is necessary, thereby promoting judicial economy.
11. Moreover, an accurate understanding of the testimony of the witness will enable H. R., the State, and the Court, to determine if the conduct alleged truly constitutes a violation of the statute alleged, and/or if the basis for the arrest was sufficient.
12. An out-of-court deposition of this witness may eliminate the need to further litigate the issues identified above, and may eliminate the need for a tedious suppression hearing and/or trial.
13. Therefore, in the interest of due process, fairness and judicial economy, it is respectfully submitted that “good cause” exists to support the request to take the depositions of Officers J. L. E., and J. T. F.

WHEREFORE, Defendant requests this Court enter an order finding the existence of good cause and grant this Motion for Leave to Take Depositions of Officers J. L. E., and J. T. F.