STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
ALBERTOINE NORDELUS, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2009-03-05
No. SC04-2408
QUINCE, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, POLSTON, and LABARGA, JJ., concur.
4 So. 3d 1217 Florida Supreme Court (2009) Positive Treatment

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 granted review, quashed the lower court's decision, and remanded for reconsideration in light of a prior controlling decision.


Facts & Procedural History

The Fourth District Court of Appeal certified conflict with another district's decision. This Court stayed proceedings pending resolution of the confl…

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 Nordelus v. State, 889 So.2d 910 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the First District Court of Appeal’s decision in State v. Bolware, 999 So.2d 660 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), approved, 995 So.2d 268 (Fla.2008). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Bolware. We have since decided Bolware, in which we approved the First District’s underlying Bol-ware decision and disapproved the Fourth District’s Nordelus decision. See Bolware v. State, 995 So.2d 268 (Fla.2008). We thus issued an order directing respondent in the present case to show cause why we should not exercise jurisdiction, quash the Fourth District’s Nordelus decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Bolware. 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 Fourth District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in Bolware.

It is so ordered.

QUINCE, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, POLSTON, and LABARGA, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw