Stephens v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Stephens v. State

549 So. 2d 187, 1989 Fla. LEXIS 952, 1989 WL 117992

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided September 28, 1989·No. No. 71578·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We accepted jurisdiction to review Stephens v. State, 513 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), because of apparent conflict with Gurganus v. State, 451 So.2d 817 (Fla.1984), concerning the defense of diminished capacity. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. After we accepted jurisdiction, however, we settled the issue in Chestnut v. State, 538 So.2d 820 (Fla.1989). As the opinion in the court below is consistent with Chestnut, we dismiss the petition for review.

It is so ordered.

EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, SHAW, BARKETT and GRIMES, JJ., concur. KOGAN, J., did not participate in this case.

NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ENTERTAINED BY THE COURT.

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

PER CURIAM.

We accepted jurisdiction to review Stephens v. State, 513 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), because of apparent conflict with Gurganus v. State, 451 So.2d 817 (Fla.1984), concerning the defense of diminished capacity. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. After we accepted jurisdiction, however, we settled the issue in Chestnut v. State, 538 So.2d 820 (Fla.1989). As the opinion in the court below is consistent with Chestnut, we dismiss the petition for review.

It is so ordered.

EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, SHAW, BARKETT and GRIMES, JJ., concur. KOGAN, J., did not participate in this case.

NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ENTERTAINED BY THE COURT.

Stephens v. State, 549 So. 2d 187, 1989 Fla. LEXIS 952, 1989 WL 117992 (Fla. 1989).

Pincite

549 So. 2d 187 (Stephens v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related