Byrd v. State
This text of 398 So. 2d 1352 (Byrd v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Brady Otis BYRD, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Clinton H. Coulter, Jr. of Duvall & Coulter, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and A.S. Johnston and Miguel A. Olivella, Jr., Asst. Attys. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution (1972), we accepted jurisdiction to resolve the conflict between the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in the instant case, 380 So.2d 457, and the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in St. John v. State, 363 So.2d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). We have since resolved the issue in State v. Webb, 398 So.2d 820 (Fla. 1981). The decision of the instant district court is in agreement with our decision. We have also considered petitioner's attack on the legality of the instant search and seizure and have determined it to be without merit. Accordingly, the petition for certiorari is denied.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, OVERTON, ALDERMAN and McDONALD, JJ., concur.
ADKINS, Acting C.J., dissents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
398 So. 2d 1352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byrd-v-state-fla-1981.