REGINALD SWINDLE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sexual Predator Designation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This appeal stems from a summary denial of a motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In that motion, defendant sought (1) removal of his designation as a sexual predator and (2) removal of certain conditions of probation. For the reasons stated in Espindola v. State, 855 So. 2d 1281, 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)(observing that “in the absence of a provision allowing for a hearing to determine whether a defendant presents a danger to the public sufficient to require registration and public notification, the Florida Sexual Predators Act [ (FSPA) ] violates procedural due process”), we reverse the trial court’s ruling as to defendant’s designation as a sexual predator. We again certify conflict with the Second District’s decision in Milks v. State, 848 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), review granted, 859 So. 2d 514 (Fla.2003). In all other respects, the lower court’s ruling is affirmed.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and conflict certified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Accardo v. Brown, 139 So. 3d 848 (Fla. 2014)…ation because the Authority holds virtually all the benefits and burdens of ownership.” Id. at 530. V. WARD v. BROWN Prior to the case now before us, the taxation of leaseholds at Navarre Beach was dealt with most recently in Ward v. [*855] Brown, 919 So. 2d 462, 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), where the First District Court considered whether the taxpayers bringing the challenge were “equitable owners of the property improvements placed on their leaseholds,” which derived from the lease granted by Escambia County…
-
Island Resorts Invs., Inc. v. Jones, 189 So. 3d 917 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…t through which lease payments were used to repay the holders of the certificates of participation that financed the project, and -could not make any profit and the appellant could acquire legal title by paying nominal consideration); Ward v. Brown, 919 So. 2d 462, 463-65 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (holding that the appellants were the equitable owners of the improvements on their leaseholds on Navarre Beach and thus were not exempt from ad valorem property taxes pursuant to section 196.199 because their 99-year lea…
-
Accardo v. Brown, 63 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…years later, we affirmed the trial court’s ruling that the Navarre Beach leaseholders were not exempt from ad valorem property taxes pursuant to section 196.199 because they were the equitable owners of the property improvements. See Ward v. Brown, 919 So. 2d 462, 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), rev. denied, 923 So. 2d 1165 (Fla.2006). [*800] Following the issuance of Ward, the Santa Rosa County Property Appraiser assessed ad valorem property taxes not only on the improvements located on Appellants’ leaseholds but…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ferman Carlos Espindola v. State, 855 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- Milks v. State, 848 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)