TYWAN D. STABLER, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2012-05-10
No. SC08-2006
LEWIS, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur., CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE and POLSTON, JJ., dissent.
90 So. 3d 267 Florida Supreme Court (2012)

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 exercised jurisdiction, quashed the First District's decision, and remanded for reconsideration in light of Jardines v. State.


Facts & Procedural History

The First District Court of Appeal certified conflict with a Fourth District decision. Proceedings were stayed pending a related case, Jardines v. Sta…

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 Stabler v. State, 990 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), in which the First District Court of Appeal certified *268conflict with the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s decision in State v. Rabb, 920 So.2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We stayed proceedings in this case pending our disposition of Jardines v. State, 73 So.3d 34 (Fla.2011), cert. granted in part, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 995, 181 L.Ed.2d 726 (2012), in which we ultimately approved the result in the Fourth District’s Rabb decision. We then issued an order directing respondent in the present case to show cause why we should not accept jurisdiction, quash the First District’s Stabler decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Jardines.

Upon consideration of the response and petitioner’s reply thereto, we have determined to exercise jurisdiction and grant the petition for review in the present case. The decision under review is quashed and this matter is remanded to the First District for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s Jardines decision.

It is so ordered.

LEWIS, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.

CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE and POLSTON, JJ., dissent.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw