Background
Juan Antonio Cantrell was charged on August 9, 2019, with first-degree misdemeanor battery allegedly committed on April 30, 2019. Florida law required the State to commence the misdemeanor prosecution within two years. Where a defendant has not already been arrested or served with a summons, filing the charging document commences prosecution only if the resulting process is executed without unreasonable delay.
After unsuccessful attempts to serve Cantrell with a summons, the State executed a capias warrant on November 26, 2025, more than six years after the alleged offense. Cantrell moved to dismiss, noting that he had spent at least 202 days in the Orange County Jail during the intervening period and had been served with arrest warrants in two other cases. The State asserted it had made five service attempts but offered no witnesses or evidence describing its search efforts.
The Court’s Holding
The Sixth District granted Cantrell’s petition for a writ of prohibition, holding that the State failed to present evidence showing it acted without unreasonable delay in executing the capias. The State did not establish that it investigated leads or checked obvious public sources of information that could have located Cantrell.
Because the State did not demonstrate the due diligence necessary to excuse the delayed execution of process, prosecution was not timely commenced under section 775.15. The court held that the trial court should have granted Cantrell’s motion to dismiss. It granted the petition but withheld issuance of the writ, expressing confidence that the county court would dismiss the case.
Key Takeaways
- Repeated attempts at service alone do not prove a diligent search.
- The State must offer evidence of the steps it took to locate a defendant when delayed service is at issue.
- A writ of prohibition may lie when a prosecution is barred by the statute of limitations.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that filing a misdemeanor charge does not preserve a prosecution indefinitely when process is not executed promptly. Prosecutors seeking to rely on delayed service must develop an evidentiary record showing concrete, diligent efforts to find the accused.