Payton v. State
This text of 732 So. 2d 1086 (Payton 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.
Opinion
Bruce Payton appeals from an order which withholds adjudication for possession of cocaine, does not place Payton on probation, and imposes court costs. This court held in Martin v. State, 600 So.2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), that an order withholding adjudication without imposing probation is not an appealable order. Based on Martin, we treat the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, strike the $253 in costs, and otherwise dismiss the appeal. In doing so, we certify conflict with the Fourth District’s decisions in Waite v. City of Ft. Lauderdale, 681 So.2d 901 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), and Schultz v. State, 700 So.2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), review granted, 707 So.2d 1127 (Fla.1998).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
732 So. 2d 1086, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 9683, 1998 WL 428805, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payton-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.