LAZARO FLORES, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2012-06-07
No. SC10-2198
CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur., LEWIS, J., dissents.
93 So. 3d 324 Florida Supreme Court (2012) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in Flores v. State, 46 So.3d 102 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), based on express and direct conflict. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Upon further consideration, we have determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss this review proceeding.

It is so ordered.

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

LEWIS, J., dissents.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Ocelyn ST. CYR v. State, 106 So. 3d 487 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
    …So. 2d 898, 899 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)). The confusion was clarified by the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Christian v. State, 84 So. 3d 437, 440 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012). See also Flores v. State, 46 So. 3d 102, 104-05 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), rev. dismissed, 93 So. 3d 324 (Fla.2012). A defendant need not have been charged or convicted of the new offense constituting the substantive violation in order for a court to sentence a youthful offender in excess of the six-year cap. See Lee v. State, 67 So. 3d 1199, 1202 (Fl…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw