DAVID BUDIN, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPT. OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ETC., 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.
The agency has jurisdiction to determine the applicability of section 550.3615(3), Florida Statutes, to an individual's situation, even if it involves a federal conviction.
David Budin, who pled guilty to conspiracy and was prohibited from committing further crimes as a condition of probation, sought a declaratory stateme…
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 Petition For Declaratory Statement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
David Budin appeals the denial of his petition for a declaratory statement regarding section 550.3615(3), Florida Statutes (1999). We reverse.
On November 23, 1998, David Bu-dín, petitioner, pled guilty to one count of conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371. He was required, as a condition of probation, not to commit another federal, state, or local crime. Section 550.3615(3), Florida Statutes, prohibits anyone convicted of bookmaking in Florida, any other state, or foreign country from attending racetracks in Florida. As a preemptive measure, Bu-din filed a Petition for Declaratory Statement with the Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, the agency, regarding the applicability of section 550.3615(3), Florida Statutes, to his situation. The agency denied the petition stating that Budin was seeking an interpretation of federal law and that he was not seeking a determination particular to his situation.
Although it is true that the agency does not have jurisdiction to interpret federal law or federal probation conditions, it is within its jurisdiction to determine whether Budin may attend a racetrack in Florida. See Department of Bus. and Profl Regulation, Div. of Pari-Mutuel Wagering v. Investment Corp. of Palm Beach, 747 So. 2d 374 (Fla.1999) (holding that an individual has a right to receive an opinion on a statute’s applicability). Therefore, we reverse the agency’s order and remand for further proceedings.1
REVERSED and REMANDED.
. The agency may, in its discretion, require Budin to file a new petition or provide further documentation.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg. v. Inv. Corp. OF Palm Beach, 747 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 1999)