Manos v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Manos v. State

969 So. 2d 357, 32 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 712, 2007 Fla. LEXIS 2170, 2007 WL 3376885

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedNovember 15, 2007

DocketNo. SC05-586

StatusPublished

This text of 969 So. 2d 357 (Manos 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

Manos v. State, 969 So. 2d 357, 32 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 712, 2007 Fla. LEXIS 2170, 2007 WL 3376885 (Fla. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Manos v. State, 895 So.2d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), in which the Fifth District Court of Appeal cited as authority Franklin v. State, 877 So.2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), quashed, 955 So.2d 564 (Fla.2007). At the time the Fifth District Court issued its decision in Manos, Franklin was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So.2d 418 (Fla.1981).

We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Franklin. We ultimately quashed the Fourth District Court’s underlying Franklin decision. See State v. Franklin, 955 So.2d 564 (Fla.2007) (citing Sanders v. State, 944 So.2d 203 (Fla.2006)). Having disposed of Franklin, we then issued an order directing respondent to show cause why we should not accept jurisdiction in the present case, quash the Manos decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Franklin. Upon consideration of respondent’s response and the parties’ previously filed jurisdictional briefs, we have determined to so proceed.

We grant the petition for review in the present case, quash the decision under review, and remand this matter to the Fifth District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in Franklin.

It is so ordered.

LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Manos v. State, 895 So.2d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), in which the Fifth District Court of Appeal cited as authority Franklin v. State, 877 So.2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), quashed, 955 So.2d 564 (Fla.2007). At the time the Fifth District Court issued its decision in Manos, Franklin was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So.2d 418 (Fla.1981).

We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Franklin. We ultimately quashed the Fourth District Court’s underlying Franklin decision. See State v. Franklin, 955 So.2d 564 (Fla.2007) (citing Sanders v. State, 944 So.2d 203 (Fla.2006)). Having disposed of Franklin, we then issued an order directing respondent to show cause why we should not accept jurisdiction in the present case, quash the Manos decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Franklin. Upon consideration of respondent’s response and the parties’ previously filed jurisdictional briefs, we have determined to so proceed.

We grant the petition for review in the present case, quash the decision under review, and remand this matter to the Fifth District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in Franklin.

It is so ordered.

LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

969 So. 2d 357, 32 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 712, 2007 Fla. LEXIS 2170, 2007 WL 3376885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manos-v-state-fla-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack