State v. Urf

524 So. 2d 1118, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1176, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1959, 1988 WL 45877
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 11, 1988·No. Nos. 87-1721, 88-797·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The state seeks certiorari review of an order of the circuit court granting Christine Urf’s motion to seal records. We find no departure from the essential requirements of law in the court’s agreement to seal its own records. See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 336 So.2d 93 (Fla.1976). However, we do agree that the court exceeded its authority in ordering the sealing by law enforcement agencies of arrest and criminal history records, because Urf, having been adjudged guilty of the offenses in question, did not qualify for such extraordinary relief. §§ 943.058(2) and 943.058(3), Fla.Stat. (1987). Accordingly the petition for writ of certiorari is granted in part and denied in part, and the circuit court is directed to correct its order of June 3, 1987, consistent with this opinion.

RYDER, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and PARKER, JJ., concur.

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

State v. Urf, 524 So. 2d 1118, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1176, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1959, 1988 WL 45877 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

524 So. 2d 1118 (State v. Urf) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Pena
593 So. 2d 282 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Ago
Florida Attorney General Reports, 1991
Russell v. Miami Herald Publishing Co.
570 So. 2d 979 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)