State v. Burke

979 So. 2d 952, 2008 WL 877967
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedApril 3, 2008
DocketSC05-1173
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 979 So. 2d 952 (State v. Burke) 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
State v. Burke, 979 So. 2d 952, 2008 WL 877967 (Fla. 2008).

Opinion

979 So.2d 952 (2008)

STATE of Florida, Petitioner,
v.
Fred O. BURKE, Respondent.

No. SC05-1173.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 3, 2008.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, Celia A. Terenzio, Bureau Chief, Richard Valuntas, and August A. Bonavita, Assistant Attorneys General, West Palm Beach, FL, for Petitioner.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Marcy K. Allen, Assistant Public Defender, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, FL, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This Court initially accepted jurisdiction to review State v. Burke, 902 So.2d 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), review granted, 919 So.2d 436 (Fla.2006) (table), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified conflict with Hilton v. State, 901 So.2d 155 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (en banc), quashed, 961 So.2d 284 (Fla.2007). We then stayed proceedings in this case pending our disposition of Hilton, which was pending review in this Court. See Hilton v. State, 961 So.2d 284 (Fla.2007) (quashing the Second District Court of Appeal's decision in Hilton, with which the Fourth District had certified conflict in Burke).

*953 When our decision in Hilton became final, we issued an order directing petitioner to show cause why our Hilton decision is not controlling in this case, and thus why we should not discharge jurisdiction and dismiss review. Upon consideration of petitioner's response and respondent's reply thereto, we conclude that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss this review proceeding.

It is so ordered.

LEWIS, C.J., and ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.

WELLS, J., dissents.

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

Related

Howard v. State
979 So. 2d 953 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
979 So. 2d 952, 2008 WL 877967, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-burke-fla-2008.