ROBERT LEWIS MYERS, PETITIONER,
v.
DAVID TOBIN, AS CIRCUIT JUDGE OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, RESPONDENT
ROBERT LEWIS MYERS, PETITIONER,
DAVID TOBIN, AS CIRCUIT JUDGE OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, RESPONDENT
556 So. 2d 1176
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1990)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, Robert Lewis Myers, seeks a writ of prohibition to disqualify respondent judge from presiding over petitioner’s criminal case. We find that petitioner’s motion was legally sufficient to require the respondent to disqualify himself. See Williams v. State, 344 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. dismissed, 351 So. 2d 409, 348 So. 2d 955 (Fla.1977); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.230(d). Because we are confident that the respondent will enter an order of recusal, we, accordingly, withhold formal issuance of our writ of prohibition. Petition granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Geiger v. Geiger, 632 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…as been deemed a failure to properly invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the trial court. Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Porbansky, 569 So. 2d 815, 817 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Nolden, 556 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). It follows that the propriety of an order modifying child support without proper pleading, notice and opportunity to be heard may be raised for the first time on appeal. In light of the above analysis, it follows that the trial…
-
Citizens & Peoples Nat'l Bank OF Pensacola v. Futch, 650 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…ification order constitutes fundamental error which may be raised for the first time on appeal. See, Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Porbansky, 569 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Holden, 556 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). In the present case, not only was Head not on notice of Kerrigan’s charging lien, but Head was no longer participating in the proceedings when the subject of the lien was raised. Therefore, this issue may be raised for the first…
-
State v. Colonel, 627 So. 2d 1320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…should not have effected a modification of the support obligation in this proceeding. See Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Porbansky, 569 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Nolden, 556 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Sentz v. Sentz, 548 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). The challenged order is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded. ERVIN, BOOTH and ALLEN, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 344 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)