STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
ROGER CARL MOLINE, 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 court held that it lacked sufficient information to perform a harmless error analysis and therefore granted the petition for review.
The case was stayed pending a decision in a related case, Galindez v. State. After the Galindez decision, the court directed the petitioner to show ca…
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 Certified Conflict cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Moline v. State, 31 Fla. L. Weekly D701, — So. 2d -, 2006 WL 504028 (Fla. 1st DCA Mar.3, 2006), in which the First District Court of Appeal certified conflict with Galindez v. State, 910 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005), approved, 955 So. 2d 517 (Fla.2007). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Galindez, which we ultimately decided on harmless error grounds based on a thorough review of the record. See Galindez v. State, 955 So. 2d 517 (Fla.2007). We thereafter issued an order directing petitioner to show cause why our Galindez decision should not control the outcome of the present case. However, petitioner’s response and respondent’s reply thereto do not contain enough information or record attachments for us to perform a Galindez harmless error analysis. Moreover, we cannot unilaterally perform such an analysis, as the record is not before this Court.
We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case. The decision under review is quashed and this matter is remanded to the First District Court for application of a harmless error analysis based on our decision in Galindez and a thorough review of the record.
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
-
Moline v. State, 982 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…PER CURIAM. The Florida Supreme Court quashed our decision in Moline v. State, 983 So. 2d 1, 2006 WL 504028 (Fla. 1st DCA Mar. 3, 2006), in State v. Moline, 976 So. 2d 576 (Fla.2008), and remanded the case to this court for a “thorough review of the record” and application of a harmless error analysis based upon its decision in Galindez v. State, 955 So. 2d 517 (Fla.2007). The supreme court’s decision did not, howev…
Authorities Cited
- Galindez v. State, 955 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 2007)
- Galindez v. State, 910 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)