Echternach v. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Echternach v. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles

119 So. 3d 467, 2013 WL 1136873, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 4399, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 656

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 20, 2013

DocketNo. 2D12-2910

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 119 So. 3d 467 (Echternach v. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles) 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

Echternach v. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 119 So. 3d 467, 2013 WL 1136873, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 4399, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 656 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

MORRIS, Judge.

Justin Echternach’s petition for second-tier writ of certiorari is denied. See Dep’t of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Robinson, 93 So.3d 1090 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). However, as we did in Robinson and subsequently in Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Ramnarine, 104 So.3d 1144 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), we certify the following question of great public importance to the supreme court pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(v):

WHEN A SUSPENDEE SEEKS FORMAL REVIEW OF A DRIVER’S LICENSE SUSPENSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 322.2615(a), FLORIDA STATUTES, IS IT A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS TO SUSPEND THE LICENSE AFTER A SUBPOENAED WITNESS FAILS TO APPEAR AND THE SUSPENDEE CANNOT ENFORCE THE SUBPOENA WITHIN THE STATUTORILY MANDATED THIRTY-DAY PERIOD FOR FORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW?

Petition denied.

SILBERMAN, C.J., and CRENSHAW, J., Concur.

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