JAMES WILSON, ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
The Florida Supreme Court held that the state is not precluded from seeking common law certiorari review of nonappealable interlocutory orders in criminal cases, but such extraordinary writs are available only when there is a violation of clearly established law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.
The state is not precluded from seeking common law certiorari review of nonappealable interlocutory orders in criminal cases, provided the extraordinary writ standard is met.
[1] The state may seek common law certiorari review of nonappealable interlocutory orders in criminal cases when there is a violation of a clearly established principle of la…
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 intelligence“there has been a violation of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice”
Standard for extraordinary writs in certiorari review
The Second District Court of Appeal certified a question of great public importance regarding whether prior holdings in Jones v. State, State v. G.P.,…
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 Miscarriage Of Justice Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Second District Court of Appeal has certified the following as a question of great public importance:
WHETHER THE HOLDINGS IN JONES V. STATE [477 So. 2d 566], NO. 64,042 (FLA. OCT. 17, 1985); STATE V. G.P. [476 So. 2d 1272], NO. 63,613 (FLA. AUG. 30, 1985); AND STATE V. C.C. [476 So. 2d 144], NO. 64,354 (FLA. AUG. 29, 1985), PRECLUDE THE STATE FROM SEEKING COMMON LAW CER-TIORARI REVIEW OF NONAP-PEALABLE INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS IN CRIMINAL CASES.
State v. Wilson, 483 So. 2d 23, 25 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution. In State v. Pettis, 520 So. 2d 250 (Fla.1988), we resolved this question and held that the state is not precluded from seeking review of interlocutory orders by common law certiorari. However, extraordinary writs are reserved for those situations where “there has been a violation of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.” Pettis, at 254 (quoting Combs v. State, 436 So. 2d 93, 96 (Fla.1983)). We have reviewed Wilson in light of this standard and find that it has been met. Accordingly, we answer the question in the negative and approve the opinion of the district court.
It is so ordered.
MCDONALD, C.J., and EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. OVERTON, J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Stevens, 563 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…The court has, however, recognized a distinction between final orders of dismissal from which the state has no statutory right of appeal, and pretrial, nonfinal orders which may be reviewable by petitions for common law certiorari. Wilson v. State, 520 So. 2d 566 (Fla.1988); State v. Pettis, 520 So. 2d 250 (Fla.1988). Even if the Pettis-Wilson rule were conceivably applicable to orders entered during trials, thereby permitting certiorari review of orders that are not subject to direct appeal by the state, th…
-
State v. Weir, 569 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…ier order thus would be irreparable. Recognizing this, the Supreme Court of Florida acknowledged the availability of certiorari review of non-final pretrial orders in criminal cases in State v. Pettis, 520 So. 2d 250 (Fla.1988), and Wilson v. State, 520 So. 2d 566 (Fla.1988). However, those cases did not address the issue of whether certiorari could in any circumstances extend to rulings on motions filed and argued prior to trial, but not actually ruled on until trial had commenced. In somewhat analogous cir…
-
State v. Vonn L. Porrey, 530 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…bery and was acquitted. The state sought to bar this line of questioning but the court ruled it admissible. In so holding the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law. State v. Wilson, 483 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), approved, 520 So. 2d 566 (Fla.1988). Accordingly, we grant the petition for certio-' rari and remand this case to the circuit court with directions to exclude testimony or other evidence of the acquittal of Por-rey’s codefendant. SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and PARKER,…
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
- Combs v. State, 436 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1983)
- State v. Pettis, 520 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 1988)
- State v. C.C., 476 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 1985)
- Hollis Jones v. State, 477 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1985)
- State v. G.P., 476 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 1985)
- State v. Wilson, 483 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)