Well, here's what Benhoor held:

The Trial Court Violated Rule 4.210(b)(7) by Failing to Bring Benhoor to Trial Within 45 Days of Receipt of Benhoor's Request for a New Trial
But, they said, the remedy is not dismissal for lack of a speedy trial under PC 1382 because:
  • PC 1382, on its face, does not apply to a Trial De Novo
  • Even if it did, the more specific VC 40902 and Rule 4.210 control, which have no time limit and no remedy, respectively


And, the reason you must show prejudice for a constitutional speedy trial violation is because of the Barker v. Wingo SCOTUS balancing test.

So, let's forget the primary argument here (which is that evidence cannot be admitted after a cause has been submitted --- that's due process, which doesn't have to use the Barker v. Wingo standard), and go to the secondary one. If you argue that the cause was not submitted until the date of trial (Jan 9), there is no doubt that the trial court violated Rule 4.210(b)(5). What is the remedy for that?

Answer: Without research, I don't know --- I can't think of a statute similar to PC 1382 that applies here. And of course, you need constitutional implications to make a solid argument....which I'm sure there will be