State v. Piacitelli

Supreme Court of Florida

State v. Piacitelli

972 So. 2d 169, 2007 WL 3286649

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedNovember 8, 2007

DocketSC07-878

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 972 So. 2d 169 (State v. Piacitelli) 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. Piacitelli, 972 So. 2d 169, 2007 WL 3286649 (Fla. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

We have for review Piacitelli v. State, 960 So.2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified conflict with Reeves v. State, 920 So.2d 724 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), approved,957 So.2d 625 (Fla. 2007), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 537,169 L.Ed.2d 377 (2007). At the time the Fourth District issued its decision in Piacitelli Reeves was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art V, § 3(b)(3)-(4), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State,405 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1981).

We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Reeves. AfterReeves was decided, we issued an order directing respondent to show cause why we should not exercise jurisdiction, quash the Piacitelli decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Reeves. Upon considering respondent's response, we have determined to do so.

We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case, quash the decision under review, and remand this matter to the Fourth District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court's decision in Reeves.

It is so ordered.

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

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

We have for review Piacitelli v. State, 960 So.2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified conflict with Reeves v. State, 920 So.2d 724 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), approved,957 So.2d 625 (Fla. 2007), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 537,169 L.Ed.2d 377 (2007). At the time the Fourth District issued its decision in Piacitelli Reeves was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art V, § 3(b)(3)-(4), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State,405 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1981).

We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Reeves. AfterReeves was decided, we issued an order directing respondent to show cause why we should not exercise jurisdiction, quash the Piacitelli decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Reeves. Upon considering respondent's response, we have determined to do so.

We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case, quash the decision under review, and remand this matter to the Fourth District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court's decision in Reeves.

It is so ordered.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

972 So. 2d 169, 2007 WL 3286649, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-piacitelli-fla-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack