JAMES RICHARD RENNIS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Affirmed conviction where trial court properly reconsidered its order dismissing charges after learning of controlling Florida Supreme Court precedent upholding the constitutionality of the statute at issue.
A trial court does not err in granting a motion to reconsider its order dismissing charges when the motion is based on controlling Florida Supreme Court precedent of which neither party was previously aware.
[1] A trial court may reconsider and reverse an order dismissing charges when presented with controlling Florida Supreme Court precedent establishing the constitutionality of…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged under Section 893.135, Florida Statutes. He filed a motion to dismiss raising a constitutional challenge to the statute. The tri…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Controlling Precedent cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant raises three issues following an adjudication of guilt and imposition of sentence upon his plea of nolo contendere. We affirm.
Only one of the issues raised requires discussion. On May 8, 1981, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 893.135, Florida Statutes (1979). State v. Yu, 400 So. 2d 762 (Fla.1981). On May 21, 1981, appellant filed a second motion to dismiss in which the identical constitutional challenge raised and rejected in State v. Yu, was advanced. However, the trial court was not advised of the Supreme Court’s decision. On June 12, 1981, a hearing was held on the motion to dismiss. The parties neither argued nor informed the court of the applicability of State v. Yu. On June 12, 1981, the trial court declared Section 893.135 to be unconstitutional. Appellant’s counsel was instructed to prepare an order which was signed by the trial court on June 12, 1981. This order did not cite State v. Yu. The order was filed in the trial court on June 25, 1981. On June 29, 1981, the State filed a Motion to Reconsider based on State v. Yu. A copy of that opinion was attached to the motion. On July 2, 1981, a hearing on the motion to reconsider was held. Counsel for both parties agreed that neither was previously aware of the Florida Supreme Court’s opinion in State v. Yu. The trial court reconsidered its previous order and denied appellant’s motion to dismiss.
While a motion for rehearing is not specifically authorized by the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, the trial court did not err in granting the motion in this case.
AFFIRMED.
LARRY G. SMITH, SHAW and JOA-NOS, JJ., concur.