STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
PEYTON HONEYCUTT, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2005-05-05
No. SC02-69
PARIENTE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.
903 So. 2d 901 Florida Supreme Court (2005) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the decision in Honeycutt v. State, 805 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), which certified conflict with the decisions in Coppola v. State, 795 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), and Regan v. State, 787 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). We accept jurisdiction, see art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const., summarily quash the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Banks v. State, 887 So. 2d 1191 (Fla.2004).

PARIENTE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Peyton E. Honeycutt v. State, 906 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
    …PER CURIAM. This case returns to us by mandate from the Supreme Court, see State v. Honeycutt, 903 So. 2d 901 (Fla.2005), to reconsider our decision in light of that court’s recent decision in Banks v. State, 887 So. 2d 1191 (Fla.2004). The trial court dismissed defendant’s rule 3.850 Heggs claim on the grounds that it was untimely, having been filed more…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw