State v. Knickerbocker
This text of 616 So. 2d 33 (State v. Knickerbocker) 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.
Opinion
STATE of Florida, Petitioner,
v.
Michael C. KNICKERBOCKER, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., James W. Rogers, Bureau Chief and Amelia L. Beisner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for petitioner.
George F. Schaefer, Gainesville, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Knickerbocker v. State, 604 So.2d 876 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), which certified the following question of great public importance:
May a sentence for a life felony be enhanced pursuant to the provisions of the habitual offender statute?
Id. at 878. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. Consistent with Lamont v. State, 610 So.2d 435 (Fla. 1992), we answer in the negative and approve the decision below to the extent it addressed the certified question. We otherwise quash the opinion below and remand for reconsideration in light of State v. Rucker, 613 So.2d 460 (Fla. 1993).
It is so ordered.
BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, SHAW, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
616 So. 2d 33, 1993 WL 83096, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-knickerbocker-fla-1993.