Traffic CASE RESULT

Richardson Hearing Victory: How Discovery Violations Excluded the Speed Evidence

103 mph in a 55. Criminal Super Speeder Charge. Evidence Excluded. Reduced to Careless Driving.

Published on by Attorney Jeff Lotter

When the State fails to turn over evidence, there are consequences. Today the court granted our Richardson hearing motion and excluded the radar evidence after ruling the State's late disclosure was "tantamount to a midnight disclosure."

Criminal Super Speeder

103 mph in a 55 zone | Alafaya Trail near University Blvd

Result: REDUCED TO CARELESS DRIVING

$250 fine + 12-hour traffic school. No criminal conviction.

The Situation: A Criminal Speeding Charge

Our client was charged with dangerous excessive speeding under Florida's new super speeder law (F.S. 316.1922). The citation alleged 103 mph in a 55 mph zone on Alafaya Trail near University Boulevard in Orlando.

What Was at Stake

Under Florida's super speeder law, driving 50+ mph over the speed limit is a criminal offense. Our client faced potential jail time, a criminal record, substantial fines, and license consequences. This wasn't a simple traffic ticket - it was a criminal case.

The Discovery Battle: A Timeline of State Failures

In criminal cases, both sides have an obligation to share evidence. This is called discovery. The State must provide the defendant with evidence they intend to use at trial - and they must do so in a timely manner.

Here's how our case unfolded:

August 2025 - Arrest

Client cited for super speeder violation on Alafaya Trail. Criminal case opened.

September 2025 - Discovery Demand

We served a formal Demand for Discovery, specifically requesting the radar calibration records, maintenance logs, and officer training certificates - all the documentation needed to establish foundation for radar evidence.

October 2025 - Motion to Compel

The State failed to provide the requested documents. We filed a Motion to Compel Discovery, formally asking the court to order the State to turn over the evidence.

Friday Before Monday Trial - Motion in Limine

Still no documents. We filed a Motion in Limine to exclude any evidence of speed. Our argument: the State's failure to timely disclose discovery violated our client's rights and prejudiced the defense.

Morning of Trial - State Requests Video

In a stunning display of unpreparedness, the State requested the traffic stop video the morning of trial. They were asking for evidence they should have already had and disclosed months earlier.

Trial Day - Richardson Hearing Granted

The court granted our motion for a Richardson hearing. After reviewing the timeline of discovery failures, the judge ruled that the State's conduct was "tantamount to a midnight disclosure" and excluded the radar evidence.

What is a Richardson Hearing?

A Richardson hearing (named after the case Richardson v. State) is a procedure used in Florida criminal cases when one party claims the other violated discovery rules. Under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220(n), when a discovery violation occurs, the court must hold a hearing to determine:

1. Was There a Violation?

Did the State fail to disclose evidence they were required to provide? In our case, the answer was clearly yes - we requested the radar documents in September, filed a motion to compel in October, and still didn't have them by trial.

2. Was It Willful or Inadvertent?

Was the violation intentional or an accident? The State's last-minute request for the video - the morning of trial - suggested systematic disorganization at best.

3. Was the Defendant Prejudiced?

Did the violation harm the defendant's ability to prepare a defense? Absolutely. Without the radar calibration records, we couldn't challenge the accuracy of the device or the officer's training.

Possible Remedies

When a Richardson violation is found, the court can: (1) grant a continuance, (2) exclude the evidence, or (3) in extreme cases, dismiss the charges entirely. The judge has discretion to fashion an appropriate remedy based on the circumstances.

The Social Media Irony

Here's something that particularly frustrated the judge: the traffic stop video was available on social media, but had never been provided in discovery.

Think About That

The public could watch the video online. Anyone with a social media account could see it. But the defendant - the person whose liberty was at stake - hadn't been provided with it through proper discovery channels.

This highlighted the State's failure to take their discovery obligations seriously. Evidence was being shared publicly but not with the defense.

The Judge's Ruling: "Tantamount to a Midnight Disclosure"

After hearing the timeline of discovery failures, the judge granted our Richardson hearing motion. The court's characterization was damning: the State's conduct was "tantamount to a midnight disclosure" - meaning their last-minute production was equivalent to dumping evidence on the defense at the last possible moment.

Evidence Excluded

The judge excluded the radar evidence. Without the speed reading, the State couldn't prove the essential element of the super speeder charge - that our client was traveling 50+ mph over the speed limit.

The Outcome: Criminal Charge Reduced

With the speed evidence excluded, the State couldn't prove the super speeder charge. However, the case didn't end there.

The remaining evidence - dash cam footage, witness observations - still showed problematic driving: lane changes, following too closely, and no child restraints. The judge wasn't pleased with our client's driving behavior either.

Final Result

  • Original charge: Criminal super speeder (F.S. 316.1922) - 103 mph in a 55
  • Reduced to: Careless driving (civil traffic infraction)
  • Sentence: $250 fine + 12-hour traffic school
  • Criminal record: None
  • Jail time: None

Was this a complete dismissal? No. But consider the alternative: a criminal conviction, potential jail time, a permanent record, and all the collateral consequences that come with a criminal traffic offense. The Richardson hearing changed the entire trajectory of this case.

Takeaways: Why Discovery Matters

1. Early Discovery Requests Are Critical

We demanded discovery in September - one month after the arrest. This established the timeline and put the State on notice that we expected compliance.

2. Document Everything

When the State failed to respond, we filed a Motion to Compel. This created a paper trail showing we took every proper step while the State ignored their obligations.

3. Escalate When Necessary

The Motion in Limine filed the Friday before trial wasn't premature - it was necessary. By that point, we had waited months with no response. We put the court on notice that we intended to object.

4. Richardson Hearings Are Powerful Tools

Many defendants don't know they can challenge discovery violations. A Richardson hearing forces the court to address the State's failures and can result in evidence exclusion or case dismissal.

5. The State Must Follow the Rules Too

Prosecutors have the full resources of the government behind them. They have no excuse for failing to produce basic documentation like radar calibration records. When they fail, there should be consequences.

Charged with Excessive Speed?

Super speeder charges can result in license suspension and criminal penalties. Learn your defense options.

Learn About Speed Defense →

Related Articles

Facing Super Speeder or Criminal Traffic Charges?

The State has obligations they must follow. When they fail to provide discovery, there are remedies available. Don't assume you have to accept whatever the prosecutor offers.

Free Consultation | Criminal Traffic Defense | Discovery Challenges | Richardson Hearings

Law Office of Jeff Lotter PLLC
Serving Orlando, Orange County, and Central Florida