HARRY K. SINGLETARY, JR., SECRETARY FOR THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PETITIONER,
v.
HILDRA JONES, RESPONDENT
HARRY K. SINGLETARY, JR., SECRETARY FOR THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PETITIONER,
HILDRA JONES, RESPONDENT
709 So. 2d 189
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1998)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We grant the petition for writ of certiorari and quash the trial court’s November 21, 1997 order which prohibits the cutting or altering of the defendant’s hair. See Florida Dep’t of Corrections v. Savariau, 600 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Florida Dep’t of Corrections v. Wilson, 594 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Martinelli v. Dugger, 817 F. 2d 1499 (11th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1012, 108 S.Ct. 714, 98 L.Ed.2d 664 (1988); Harris v. Chapman, 97 F. 3d 499 (11th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 2422, 138 L.Ed.2d 185 (1997).
GUNTHER, WARNER and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mitchell v. Mitchell, 198 So. 3d 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…e injunction “has reasonable cause to believe he or she is in imminent danger” (emphases added)); Spiegel v. Haas, 697 So. 2d 222, 224 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (discussing the “future violence” requirement), superseded in other part, Patterson v. Simonik, 709 So. 2d 189, 191 n. * (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). “In determining whether the [petitioner’s] fear is reasonable, the trial court must consider the current allegations, the parties’ behavior within the relationship, and the history of the relationship as a whole.” Malc…
-
Mohamed Shaheed Bacchus v. Heba Bacchus, 108 So. 3d 712 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…nza v. Giallanza, 787 So. 2d 162, 164 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). In determining the reasonableness of Wife’s fear, the trial court was not limited to examining the circumstances occurring after the previous injunction was entered. See Patterson v. Simonik, 709 So. 2d 189, 190 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). The trial court could also consider the circumstances that initially led to the imposition of the injunction to determine whether Wife’s continuing fear of future violence was reasonable. Id. at 190; see also § 741.30(6)(b),…
-
Ginny L. Sheehan v. Sheehan, 853 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…e granted in addition to other civil or criminal remedies. § 741.30(6)(b), Fla. Stat. (2001) (emphasis added). While Sheehan is correct that the statute does not specifically require any allegation of a new act of violence, in Patterson v. Simonik, 709 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), the Third District construed the statute as follows: In making its decision as to whether a permanent injunction should be extended, we believe that section 741.30(6)(b) requires a court to determine whether the petitioner’s pro…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Harris v. Chapman, 97 F.3d 499 (11th Cir. 1996)
- Martinelli v. Dugger, 817 F.2d 1499 (11th Cir. 1987)
- Eagle Hawk v. United States, 484 U.S. 1012 (U.S. 1988)
- Fla. Dep't OF Corr. v. Wilson, 594 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Chambers v. Getty, 484 U.S. 1012 (U.S. 1988)
- Fla. Dep't OF Corr. v. Rohan Savariau, 600 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Taylor v. State, 600 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)