TIM FURR, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. Finney v. State, 420 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (en banc); Jackson v. State, 382 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), aff’d, 392 So. 2d 1324 (Fla.1981); United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 93 S.Ct. 764, 35 L.Ed.2d 67 (1973); United States v. Crews, 445 U.S. 463, 100 S.Ct. 1244, 63 L.Ed.2d 537 (1980).
BASKIN, Judge
(dissenting).
Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382 (Fla.1979) authorizes this court to review dispositive issues reserved upon the entry of pleas of nolo contendere. Jackson v. State, 382 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), aff’d, 392 So. 2d 1324 (Fla.1981), cited by the majority opinion, recognizes that some issues may be dispositive upon stipulation by the parties. In the case before us, however, neither of the two reserved issues is dispositive; the state indicated it could proceed if either ruling were reversed. Thus, under Jackson v. State and Brown v. State, this court must remand the cause and permit defendant Furr to withdraw his plea, as I indicated in Finney v. State, 420 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (en banc) (Baskin, J., dissenting).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Logan Finney v. State, 420 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…NESBITT, Judge. On its own motion, this court granted a rehearing en banc to review the original [*641] majority opinion due to a conflict in Furr v. State, 420 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (Case no. 80-2203, opinion filed October 5, 1982.) Because motions for rehearing en banc constitute an extraordinary procedural device to harmonize conflicts within a given district court of appeal, we first examine whether suffi…1 / 2
-
Deguster Blake Zeigler v. State, 471 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…he same basic question before us in this case and concluded that stipulations as to dispositiveness are binding on the appellate courts. In Finney, ,the court granted rehearing en banc to resolve a conflict between the Finney case and Furr v. State, 420 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). In both cases, the defense and state had stipulated that a motion to suppress denied by the trial court would be disposi-tive on appeal from the defendant’s nolo contendere plea. In Finney, the court reexamined the issue raised,…
-
Martinez v. State, 420 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…BASKIN, Judge (dissenting). As I indicated in my dissents in Finney v. State, 420 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) and Furr v. State, 420 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), I am unwilling to adopt the majority view because it disregards the supreme court decision in Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382 (Fla.1979), which holds that an issue must be dispositive before an appellate court may accept review. I…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1973)
- United States v. Crews, 445 U.S. 463 (U.S. 1980)
- Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1979)
- Logan Finney v. State, 420 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Nat'l Brands, Inc. v. Willis, 382 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Jackson v. State, 392 So. 2d 1324 (Fla. 1981)