Jantzen v. State

422 So. 2d 1090, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21791
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 7, 1982
DocketNo. 82-1372
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 422 So. 2d 1090 (Jantzen v. State) 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
Jantzen v. State, 422 So. 2d 1090, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21791 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner Jackie M. Jantzen seeks certiorari review of an order of the circuit court affirming, in its appellate capacity, a county court conviction for remaining in a building or structure for the purpose of prostitution, lewdness or assignation [§ 796.07(3)(c), Fla.Stat. (1981)]. We have jurisdiction to entertain this petition. Art. Y, § 4(b)(3), Fla. Const.

A petition for a writ of certiorari plainly lies in this case as the two essential requirements for certiorari relief are present herein. First, the petitioner has no adequate remedy by appeal from the order under review because no appeal of any kind lies from said order. Second, the said order constitutes a departure from essential requirements of law. There is utterly no evidence in this record — and the state makes no contention to the contrary — which remotely establishes an essential element of the crime charged, namely, that the petitioner Jantzen, while remaining in a certain health spa as a masseuse, did so, “for the purpose of prostitution, lewdness, or assignation.” § 796.07(3)(c), Fla.Stat. (1981). This admitted, complete failure of proof as to the above essential element of the crime charged, required the circuit court to reverse the petitioner’s conviction on appeal and its failure to do so constitutes a departure from essential requirements of law. Cohen v. State, 99 So.2d 563, 565 (Fla.1957); Newman v. State, 174 So.2d 479, 484 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965).

The order under review is quashed and the cause is remanded to the circuit court with directions to reverse the subject county court conviction and direct the discharge of the petitioner from the cause.

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

Related

Millar v. State
655 So. 2d 1237 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
422 So. 2d 1090, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jantzen-v-state-fladistctapp-1982.