Dumas v. State
Opinion
Anthony DUMAS, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Asst. Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami, for petitioner.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Michael J. Neimand, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
We originally accepted jurisdiction in this cause, reported below as Dumas v. State, 439 So.2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), on the basis of conflict with Cirio v. State, 440 So.2d 650 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), and Johnson v. State, 411 So.2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Upon further review, we find that there is no conflict because of the distinctive factual circumstances in the instant case, and, consequently, no basis for this Court to accept jurisdiction. The petition for review is denied.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and OVERTON, ALDERMAN, McDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
ADKINS, J., dissents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
462 So. 2d 1105 (Dumas v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.