Edwards v. State

780 So. 2d 86, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6564, 1998 WL 299350

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 10, 1998·No. No. 97-01791·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm and certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question certified in Williams v. State, 700 So.2d 750 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997):

SHOULD THE REQUIREMENT THAT A DEFENDANT PAY FOR DRUG TESTING BE TREATED AS A GENERAL CONDITION OF PROBATION FOR WHICH NOTICE IS PROVIDED BY SECTION 948.09(6), FLORIDA STATUTES (1995), OR SHOULD IT BE TREATED AS A SPECIAL CONDITION THAT REQUIRES ORAL ANNOUNCEMENT?

PARKER, C.J., and QUINCE and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm and certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question certified in Williams v. State, 700 So.2d 750 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997):

SHOULD THE REQUIREMENT THAT A DEFENDANT PAY FOR DRUG TESTING BE TREATED AS A GENERAL CONDITION OF PROBATION FOR WHICH NOTICE IS PROVIDED BY SECTION 948.09(6), FLORIDA STATUTES (1995), OR SHOULD IT BE TREATED AS A SPECIAL CONDITION THAT REQUIRES ORAL ANNOUNCEMENT?

PARKER, C.J., and QUINCE and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

Edwards v. State, 780 So. 2d 86, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6564, 1998 WL 299350 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

780 So. 2d 86 (Edwards v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Edwards v. State

728 So. 2d 736 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)

Opinion

Related