State v. Johnson

467 So. 2d 412, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 864, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13288
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 3, 1985·No. No. 85-194·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

WALDEN, Judge.

The County Court has certified a question to this court pursuant to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.030 (b)(4), 9.160, and 9.165, which rules became effective beginning October 1, 1984.1

We decline to accept jurisdiction because the certification procedure employed does not meet the essential criteria, jurisdictional and otherwise, specified in the above-mentioned appellate rules. More particularly, there are these defects:

1. We are called upon to review a non-final amended order of clarification and not a “final judgment” that certifies a question.
2. Neither the order certifying question nor the amended order of clarification state or frame the question to be certified. Instead, we are simply referred to the question involved in the six-page amended order of clarification and left to our own devices in order to unearth a specific question.
3. Neither the order certifying question nor amended order of clarification contain sufficient findings of fact.

We decline to accept jurisdiction and dismiss the above-styled appeal.

It is so

ORDERED.

GLICKSTEIN and BARKETT, JJ., concur.

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

State v. Johnson, 467 So. 2d 412, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 864, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13288 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

467 So. 2d 412 (State v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

3299 N. Federal Hwy. v. BROWARD CTY. COM'RS
646 So. 2d 215 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)