NANCY I. SPEARS, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Substantive Due Process cases and more on FLexlaw
PLEUS, J.
Nancy Spears appeals from an immediate final order issued by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services advising her that her citrus trees would be destroyed because the trees are infected with citrus canker or are exposed to citrus canker by being located within 1900 feet of diseased trees.
Spears challenges the constitutionality of section 581.184, Florida Statutes, governing citrus canker eradication. She asserts that the statute is unconstitutional as violating her rights to procedural due process, that the science underlying the enactment is flawed and thus the statute violates her right to substantive due process, and that the enactment fails to adequately assure just compensation.
These challenges were rejected in Florida Dep’t of Agriculture and Consumer Services v. Haire, 836 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. granted, 842 So. 2d 844 (Fla.2003). Recently, in Kirchgessner v. Florida Dep’t of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 849 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003), this court rejected similar challenges on the authority of Haire.
Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crumbie v. State, 16 So. 3d 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…ether she had been untruthful with law enforcement. The admission of evidence of a defendant’s prior charge of murder is highly inflammatory. When evidence of a collateral crime is admitted improperly, it is presumptively harmful. Fiddemon v. State, 858 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). In McLean v. State, 934 So. 2d 1248, 1261 (Fla.2006), the Florida Supreme Court held that “[cjollat-eral crime evidence violates a defendant’s right to due process if it is so prejudicial that it denies the defendant a fair tria…
-
Desmond D. Sanders v. State, 254 So. 3d 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
-
Candy Ann Turben v. State, 884 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…en the door” to otherwise inadmissible evidence of prior offenses by (1) offering a trait of the defendant’s good character, or (2) testifying inaccurately to material facts. See Robertson v. State, 829 So. 2d 901, 912 (Fla.2002); Fiddemon v. State, 858 So. 2d 1100, 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Bozeman v. State, 698 So. 2d 629, 630-31 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). The concept was explained in Boze-man: To open the door to evidence of prior bad acts, the defense must first offer misleading testimony or make a specific fac…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fla. Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. John M. and Patricia A. Haire, 836 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Kirchgessner v. Fla. Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs., 849 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
- Blue v. State, 849 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)