STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
M.S.P., RESPONDENT
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the decision in M.S.P. v. State, 640 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), which certified conflict with the opinion in B.H. v. State, 622 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla.Const. The decision below is quashed and the case remanded for reconsideration in light of our opinion in B.H. v. State, 645 So. 2d 987 (Fla.1994).
It is so ordered.
GRIMES, C.J., OVERTON and WELLS, JJ., and MeDONALD, Senior Justice, concur. HARDING, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion.
KOGAN, J., dissents with an opinion, in which SHAW, J., concurs.
[*848] HARDING, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in part and dissent in part for the reasons stated in my separate opinion to B.H. v. State, 645 So. 2d 987 (Fla.1994) (Harding, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part).
KOGAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent for the reasons expressed in my separate opinion in B.H.
SHAW, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- B.H. v. State, 645 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 1994)
- B.H. v. State, 622 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
- Levine v. Constitution Bank, 640 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)