Payton v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Payton v. State

732 So. 2d 1044, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 101, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 254, 1999 WL 95438

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedFebruary 25, 1999

DocketNo. 93,653

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 732 So. 2d 1044 (Payton 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

Payton v. State, 732 So. 2d 1044, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 101, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 254, 1999 WL 95438 (Fla. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

HARDING, C.J.

We have for review the decision in Payton v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1817, 732 So.2d 1086 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), which the district court certified to be in conflict with the opinions in Waite v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 681 So.2d 901 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), and Schultz v. State, 700 So.2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), approved, 720 So.2d 247 (Fla. 1998). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.

The district court below held that an order withholding adjudication without imposing probation is not an appealable order. In State v. Schultz, 720 So.2d 247 (Fla.1998), this Court held that an order withholding adjudication of guilt without placing the defendant on probation is ap-pealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, we quash the decision of the district court below and remand this case for proceedings consistent with our opinion in Schultz.

It is so ordered.

SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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