Valeo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Valeo v. State

745 So. 2d 542, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16549, 1999 WL 1115429

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 8, 1999

DocketNo. 99-0824

StatusPublished

This text of 745 So. 2d 542 (Valeo v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Valeo v. State, 745 So. 2d 542, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16549, 1999 WL 1115429 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have redesignated as a petition for writ of certiorari the appeal filed by James Valeo (Petitioner) from an order of the Broward County circuit court, in its appellate capacity. Valeo seeks review of the order dismissing his appeal of the county court order revoking his probation on a second DUI conviction and imposing a jail sentence after he was found guilty of a third DUI, as well as the order denying his motion for reconsideration. We grant the petition.

Following an evidentiary hearing, the circuit court concluded that Petitioner’s counsel’s conduct in failing to appear at a hearing on the state’s motion to dismiss was not willful or intentional. Under the particular circumstances of this case, dismissal of the appeal was too harsh a sanction and a denial of procedural due process. Haines City Community Development v. Heggs, 658 So.2d 523 (Fla. 1995); see also Lahti v. Porn, 624 So.2d 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).

WARNER, C.J., GUNTHER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We have redesignated as a petition for writ of certiorari the appeal filed by James Valeo (Petitioner) from an order of the Broward County circuit court, in its appellate capacity. Valeo seeks review of the order dismissing his appeal of the county court order revoking his probation on a second DUI conviction and imposing a jail sentence after he was found guilty of a third DUI, as well as the order denying his motion for reconsideration. We grant the petition.

Following an evidentiary hearing, the circuit court concluded that Petitioner’s counsel’s conduct in failing to appear at a hearing on the state’s motion to dismiss was not willful or intentional. Under the particular circumstances of this case, dismissal of the appeal was too harsh a sanction and a denial of procedural due process. Haines City Community Development v. Heggs, 658 So.2d 523 (Fla. 1995); see also Lahti v. Porn, 624 So.2d 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).

WARNER, C.J., GUNTHER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

745 So. 2d 542, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16549, 1999 WL 1115429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valeo-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack