State v. Gilbert

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Gilbert

880 So. 2d 1284, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 13265, 2004 WL 1948660

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 3, 2004

DocketNos. 2D03-5426, 2D03-5480, 2D04-809

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 880 So. 2d 1284 (State v. Gilbert) 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

State v. Gilbert, 880 So. 2d 1284, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 13265, 2004 WL 1948660 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

In three separate Polk County cases, Dawn Gilbert, John Paul Story, and Decar-lo Johnson were charged with failure to redeliver leased property, a third-degree felony in violation of section 812.155, Florida Statutes (2002). The circuit court dismissed each case based on the defense argument that the statute is a prohibited special law and therefore unconstitutional. The State timely appeals and argues that section 812.155 is not a prohibited special law and is, therefore, constitutional. In related cases, this court recently agreed with the State’s position and held that the statute is constitutional. State v. Rose, 876 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (reversing dismissal of criminal charges). Based on Rose, we reverse the dismissal of criminal charges against Gilbert, Story, and Johnson.

Reversed and remanded.

SALCINES and COVINGTON, JJ., concur.

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

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

In three separate Polk County cases, Dawn Gilbert, John Paul Story, and Decar-lo Johnson were charged with failure to redeliver leased property, a third-degree felony in violation of section 812.155, Florida Statutes (2002). The circuit court dismissed each case based on the defense argument that the statute is a prohibited special law and therefore unconstitutional. The State timely appeals and argues that section 812.155 is not a prohibited special law and is, therefore, constitutional. In related cases, this court recently agreed with the State’s position and held that the statute is constitutional. State v. Rose, 876 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (reversing dismissal of criminal charges). Based on Rose, we reverse the dismissal of criminal charges against Gilbert, Story, and Johnson.

Reversed and remanded.

SALCINES and COVINGTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

880 So. 2d 1284, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 13265, 2004 WL 1948660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gilbert-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack