NOEL K. BANGO, PETITIONER,
v.
JAMES V. CROSBY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT

Fla. 1st DCA | 2006-02-23
No. 1D04-5032
ERVIN, WOLF and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
921 So. 2d 779 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. As the circuit court entered its order without affording petitioner time to file his reply to the Department’s response, we quash the order of the circuit court. This case is hereby remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings. See Forbes v. Crosby, 866 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). In light of this disposition, we decline to address the correctness of the circuit court’s decision at this time.

PETITION GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED; REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

ERVIN, WOLF and BROWNING, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Massery v. State, 953 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
    …orthiness in the lab report, the report will be inadmissible. See § 90.803(6)(a), Fla. Stat. Id. at 627-28. In fact, we have applied the Peters reasoning in a probation revocation case not involving a true split sentence. . See Ramsey v. State, 921 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). There is no valid basis for treating other types of probation revocation cases differently than those involving true split sentencing.…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw