ANDREW MANOS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 Florida Supreme Court granted review, quashed the Fifth District's decision in Manos, and remanded for reconsideration in light of the Court's intervening decision in Franklin v. State.
A lower appellate court decision must be reconsidered in light of a subsequently decided controlling precedent from the Florida Supreme Court.
[1] When a lower appellate court's decision relies upon authority that is subsequently overruled or quashed by the Florida Supreme Court, the lower court's decision must be r…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceManos was decided by the Fifth District Court of Appeal citing Franklin v. State as authority; Franklin was pending review in the Florida Supreme Cour…
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 Remand For Reconsideration cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Manos v. State, 895 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), in which the Fifth District Court of Appeal cited as authority Franklin v. State, 877 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), quashed, 955 So. 2d 564 (Fla.2007). At the time the Fifth District Court issued its decision in Manos, Franklin was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla.1981).
We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Franklin. We ultimately quashed the Fourth District Court’s underlying Franklin decision. See State v. Franklin, 955 So. 2d 564 (Fla.2007) (citing Sanders v. State, 944 So. 2d 203 (Fla.2006)). Having disposed of Franklin, we then issued an order directing respondent to show cause why we should not accept jurisdiction in the present case, quash the Manos decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Franklin. Upon consideration of respondent’s response and the parties’ previously filed jurisdictional briefs, we have determined to so proceed.
We grant the petition for review in the present case, quash the decision under review, and remand this matter to the Fifth District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in Franklin.
It is so ordered.
LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jupiter v. State, 974 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…PER CURIAM. DENIED. See In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure-Rule 9.141 and Rule 9.142, 969 So. 2d 357 (Fla.2007); see also, Mendez-Perez v. Perez-Perez, 656 So. 2d 458 (Fla.1995). WEBSTER, BENTON, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981)
- Sanders v. State, 944 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2006)
- Franklin v. State, 877 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- State v. Franklin, 955 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 2007)
- Manos v. State, 895 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)