DONALD OTIS WILLIAMS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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 transferred the all writs petition to the Fifth District Court of Appeal to be treated as a mandamus proceeding.
[1] An all writs petition seeking mandamus relief may be transferred from the Florida Supreme Court to a district court of appeal for consideration as a mandamus proceeding,…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“[W]e now hold that in addition to our appellate jurisdiction over sentences of death, we have exclusive jurisdiction to review all types of collateral proceedings in death penalty cases.”
Justice Labarga's concurrence citing State v. Fourth Dist. Court of Appeal, 697 So. 2d 70, 71 (Fla. 1997), to emphasize that the transfer decision should not be interpreted as changing the Court's precedent on capital case jurisdiction
Petitioner Donald Otis Williams filed an all writs petition seeking to compel the trial court to include him in certain proceedings and to rule on pen…
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 Mandamus Proceeding cases and more on FLexlaw
Supreme Court of Florida
THURSDAY, AUGUST 29, 2019
CASE NO.: SC18-2081 Lower Tribunal No(s).: 352011CF000105AXXXXX
DONALD OTIS WILLIAMS
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA
Petitioner(s) Respondent(s)
Petitioner has submitted what is styled an all writs petition, seeking to compel the trial court to include him in certain proceedings and to rule on pending motions, and related pleadings. This case is hereby transferred to the Fifth District Court of Appeal for consideration as a mandamus proceeding. The transferee court shall treat the petition and related pleadings as if it had been originally filed there on the date it was filed in this Court. Any determination concerning the timeliness of this appellate proceeding shall be made by the transferee court. Any determination concerning whether a filing fee shall be applicable to this case shall be made by the transferee court. Any and all pending motions in this case are hereby deferred to the transferee court. Any future pleadings filed regarding this case should be filed in the above-mentioned district court at 300 South Beach Street, Daytona Beach, Florida 32114. CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LAWSON, LAGOA, LUCK, and MUÑIZ, JJ., concur. LABARGA, J., concurs in result with an opinion.
CASE NO.: SC18-2081 Page Two
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND,
IF FILED, DETERMINED.
LABARGA, J., concurring in result.
Based upon the unique facts and circumstances presented by this case, I concur with the decision of the majority to transfer this matter to the Fifth District Court of Appeal. However, I wish to emphasize that my decision in this specific case should not be interpreted as a change in my view with respect to this Court’s longstanding precedent governing our jurisdiction over capital cases. See State v. Fourth Dist. Court of Appeal, 697 So. 2d 70, 71 (Fla. 1997) (“[W]e now hold that in addition to our appellate jurisdiction over sentences of death, we have exclusive jurisdiction to review all types of collateral proceedings in death penalty cases. This includes cases in which this Court has vacated a death sentence and remanded for further penalty proceedings.” (emphasis supplied)). A True Copy Test:
CASE NO.: SC18-2081 Page Three
cd Served: