Mathis v. State

680 So. 2d 633, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10935, 1996 WL 590781
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 16, 1996·No. No. 96-2163·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. However, as in Freeman v. State, 679 So.2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), we certify to the supreme court the following question as one of great public importance:

IS STATE V. GRAY, 654 So.2d 552 (Fla.1995) RETROACTIVE?

AFFIRMED.

DELL, STONE and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

Mathis v. State, 680 So. 2d 633, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 10935, 1996 WL 590781 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

680 So. 2d 633 (Mathis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mathis v. State
692 So. 2d 156 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1997)