State v. Rubin
This text of 721 So. 2d 716 (State v. Rubin) 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.
Steven RUBIN, et al., Respondents.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, Miami, for Petitioner.
Ira N. Loewy of Bierman, Shohat, Loewy, Perry & Klein, P.A., Miami, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Rubin v. State, 697 So.2d 161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), which certified conflict with Hines v. State, 587 So.2d 620 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), concerning scoresheet errors. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4).
We resolved this issue in State v. Mackey, 719 So.2d 284 (Fla.1998), by disapproving a rule of per se reversal in cases involving scoresheet errors. To that extent, we disapproved Mackey and approved Hines. Accordingly, that portion of the district court's decision that applied the per se rule of reversal is quashed. We remand for the Third District's reconsideration of this case in light of our decision in Mackey.
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, WELLS, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
721 So. 2d 716, 1998 WL 650584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-rubin-fla-1998.