Seabrook v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Seabrook v. State

620 So. 2d 227, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 6476, 1993 WL 206578

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 15, 1993

DocketNo. 92-413

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 620 So. 2d 227 (Seabrook 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

Seabrook v. State, 620 So. 2d 227, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 6476, 1993 WL 206578 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the State’s motion for rehearing, we grant the motion, withdraw our opinion filed February 23, 1993, and substitute the following opinion in lieu thereof.

The trial court failed to make an express finding that the reserved issue was disposi-tive. Moreover, the parties did not stipulate that the issue was dispositive. In fact, the State argued below that it would be able to go forward without the confidential informant’s testimony. Therefore, the issue was not preserved for appellate review. See Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Everett v. State, 535 So.2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); D.K.G. v. State, 460 So.2d 549 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

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

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the State’s motion for rehearing, we grant the motion, withdraw our opinion filed February 23, 1993, and substitute the following opinion in lieu thereof.

The trial court failed to make an express finding that the reserved issue was disposi-tive. Moreover, the parties did not stipulate that the issue was dispositive. In fact, the State argued below that it would be able to go forward without the confidential informant’s testimony. Therefore, the issue was not preserved for appellate review. See Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Everett v. State, 535 So.2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); D.K.G. v. State, 460 So.2d 549 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

620 So. 2d 227, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 6476, 1993 WL 206578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seabrook-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack