Bostic v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bostic v. State

708 So. 2d 695, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4748

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 29, 1998

DocketNos. 96-4960, 96-4962

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 708 So. 2d 695 (Bostic v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bostic v. State, 708 So. 2d 695, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4748 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant died during the pendency of his appeal challenging various convictions and sentences. The estate of the appellant has opposed the state’s motion to dismiss on grounds of mootness, contending that the appeal is not moot because the trial court imposed a fine upon the appellant that the state could attempt to collect from the appellant’s estate. However, in light of the state’s representation to this court that “[t]he State will not attempt to collect the fine from Appellant’s estate,” we conclude that the appellant has not demonstrated good cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. See State v. Clements, 668 So.2d 980 (Fla.1996).

We accordingly dismiss the appeal as moot.

BARFIELD, C.J., and ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The appellant died during the pendency of his appeal challenging various convictions and sentences. The estate of the appellant has opposed the state’s motion to dismiss on grounds of mootness, contending that the appeal is not moot because the trial court imposed a fine upon the appellant that the state could attempt to collect from the appellant’s estate. However, in light of the state’s representation to this court that “[t]he State will not attempt to collect the fine from Appellant’s estate,” we conclude that the appellant has not demonstrated good cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. See State v. Clements, 668 So.2d 980 (Fla.1996).

We accordingly dismiss the appeal as moot.

BARFIELD, C.J., and ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

708 So. 2d 695, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bostic-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack