Woodard v. State

884 So. 2d 100, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5582, 2004 WL 868187
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Woodard v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 885 So. 2d 444
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 23, 2004·No. No. 2D03-1504·Published

Opinion

VILLANTI, Judge.

Edward David Woodard entered a plea of nolo contendere to failing to register as a sexual predator while reserving his right to appeal, on procedural due process grounds, the constitutionality of the Florida Sexual Predators Act. In support of his due process argument, Woodard cites Espindola v. State, 855 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), which conflicts with this court’s decision in Milks v. State, 848 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 859 So.2d 514 (Fla.2003). We reject Woodard’s due process argument, see id., affirm his judgment and sentence, and certify conflict with Espindola.

Affirmed; conflict certified.

NORTHCUTT and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

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

Woodard v. State, 884 So. 2d 100, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5582, 2004 WL 868187 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

884 So. 2d 100 (Woodard v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Milks v. State
848 So. 2d 1167 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Espindola v. State
855 So. 2d 1281 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)