Shaw v. State
Opinion
Tyrone E. SHAW, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Thomas F. Almon, Miami, for petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Carol Cobourn, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.
BARKETT, Justice.
We have for review Shaw v. State, 543 So.2d 469 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), in which the district court affirmed Shaw's conviction and sentence on the authority of State v. Avery, 531 So.2d 182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), and certified the same question as it certified in Avery. We have discretionary jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in Bostick v. State, 554 So.2d 1153 (Fla. 1989), we answer the certified question, as rephrased therein, in the affirmative, quash the opinion of the district court, and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with Bostick.
It is so ordered.
EHRLICH, C.J., and SHAW and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
OVERTON, McDONALD and GRIMES, JJ., dissent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
555 So. 2d 351 (Shaw v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.