Thaden v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Thaden v. State

874 So. 2d 1238, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 7568, 2004 WL 1176228

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 28, 2004·No. No. 1D03-3341·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Therrien v. State, 859 So.2d 585, 587 (Fla. 1st DCA) (rejecting appellant’s argument that section 775.21, Florida Statutes (2000), violated his right to procedural due process, because it did not require a hearing to determine whether he posed a danger to the public), review ‘pending, No. SC03-2219 (Fla. Dec. 18, 2003). Accord Glenn v. State, 861 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Reyes v. State, 854 So.2d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Milks v. State, 848 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 859 So.2d 514 (Fla.2003). We certify conflict with Espindola v. State, 855 So.2d 1281, 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, C.J., ERVIN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Therrien v. State, 859 So.2d 585, 587 (Fla. 1st DCA) (rejecting appellant’s argument that section 775.21, Florida Statutes (2000), violated his right to procedural due process, because it did not require a hearing to determine whether he posed a danger to the public), review ‘pending, No. SC03-2219 (Fla. Dec. 18, 2003). Accord Glenn v. State, 861 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Reyes v. State, 854 So.2d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Milks v. State, 848 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 859 So.2d 514 (Fla.2003). We certify conflict with Espindola v. State, 855 So.2d 1281, 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, C.J., ERVIN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Thaden v. State, 874 So. 2d 1238, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 7568, 2004 WL 1176228 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

874 So. 2d 1238 (Thaden v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related