Zito v. State

682 So. 2d 675, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11648, 1996 WL 637668
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 6, 1996·No. No. 96-2024·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. However, as in Freeman v. State, 679 So.2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), we certify to the supreme court the following question as-oné of great public importance:

IS STATE V. GRAY, 654 So.2d 552 (Fla.1995) RETROACTIVE?

AFFIRMED.

DELL, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

Zito v. State, 682 So. 2d 675, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11648, 1996 WL 637668 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

682 So. 2d 675 (Zito v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Freeman v. State
679 So. 2d 364 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
State v. Gray
654 So. 2d 552 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)