Hamilton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hamilton v. State

555 So. 2d 969, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 456, 1990 WL 5229

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 26, 1990·No. No. 88-02351·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction for purchase of cannabis * on the authority of Blankenship v. State, 545 So.2d 908 (Fla.2d DCA 1989). As in Blankenship we certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question, which we deem to be of great public importance:

DOES SECTION 893.13, FLORIDA STATUTES (1987), VIOLATE THE ONE SUBJECT RULE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION?

CAMPBELL, C.J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction for purchase of cannabis * on the authority of Blankenship v. State, 545 So.2d 908 (Fla.2d DCA 1989). As in Blankenship we certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question, which we deem to be of great public importance:

DOES SECTION 893.13, FLORIDA STATUTES (1987), VIOLATE THE ONE SUBJECT RULE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION?

CAMPBELL, C.J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

Hamilton v. State, 555 So. 2d 969, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 456, 1990 WL 5229 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

555 So. 2d 969 (Hamilton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Footnotes

Related