Jackson v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Jackson v. State

776 So. 2d 271, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 25, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 9, 2001 WL 23115

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJanuary 11, 2001

DocketNo. SC96308

StatusPublished

This text of 776 So. 2d 271 (Jackson 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.

Bluebook

Jackson v. State, 776 So. 2d 271, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 25, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 9, 2001 WL 23115 (Fla. 2001).

Pincite

Opinions

LEWIS, J.

We have for review the decision in Jackson v. State, 744 So.2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District certified the same question it had in Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), approved sub nom. State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345 (Fla.2000).¹ We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We have recently approved the First District’s decision in Woods, holding that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act² (the “Act”), as properly interpreted by the First District, does not violate separation of powers, and rejecting other constitutional challenges to the Act. See State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345 (Fla.2000). Accordingly, for the reasons expressed in Cotton, we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the First District’s decision.

It is so ordered.

WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ„ concur. QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion.

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

LEWIS, J.

We have for review the decision in Jackson v. State, 744 So.2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District certified the same question it had in Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), approved sub nom. State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345 (Fla.2000).¹ We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We have recently approved the First District’s decision in Woods, holding that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act² (the “Act”), as properly interpreted by the First District, does not violate separation of powers, and rejecting other constitutional challenges to the Act. See State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345 (Fla.2000). Accordingly, for the reasons expressed in Cotton, we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the First District’s decision.

It is so ordered.

WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ„ concur. QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

776 So. 2d 271, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 25, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 9, 2001 WL 23115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-state-fla-2001.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack