STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
ZACHERY ANTONIO DENEGALL, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2008-07-10
No. SC07-1600
QUINCE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.
986 So. 2d 1289 Florida Supreme Court (2008)

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.


Holding

The court quashed the Second District Court's decision and remanded for reconsideration in light of Griffin.


Facts & Procedural History

The Second District Court of Appeal cited a prior decision which certified conflict with another district court. This court stayed proceedings pending…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Denegall v. State, 975 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), in which the Second District Court of Appeal cited as authority its decision in Griffin v. State, 946 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), quashed, 980 So. 2d 1035 (Fla.2008), and, as it had done in Griffin, certified conflict with the First District Court of Appeal’s decision in Ridgeway v. State, 892 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), approved by Griffin v. State, 980 So. 2d 1035 (Fla.2008). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Griffin. We have since decided Griffin, in which we quashed in part the Second District Court’s under lying Griffin decision and approved the First District Court’s Ridgeway decision. See Griffin v. State, 980 So. 2d 1035 (Fla.2008). We thus issued an order directing respondent in the present case to show cause why we should not exercise jurisdiction, quash the Second District Court’s Denegall decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Griffin. Respondent did not respond to that order, thereby constructively conceding that we should so proceed.

We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case. The decision under review is quashed and this matter is remanded to the Second District Court for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in Griffin.

It is so ordered.

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


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw