GERALD WAYNE LIPKE, PETITIONER,
v.
JOE A. COWART, JR., JUDGE OF THE COURT OF RECORD, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida Supreme Court denied certiorari because it had already overruled in Brown v. State the Adams v. Elliott precedent that petitioner relied upon to establish conflict between lower court decisions.
A petition for certiorari must be denied when the precedent cited to establish conflict has been expressly overruled by the Court.
[1] A precedent relied upon to establish conflict between lower court decisions is no longer a valid basis for certiorari review if that precedent has been expressly overrule…
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“Where a crime may be punished as a misdemeanor or as a felony, all doubts will be resolved in the defendant's favor and the crime will be considered a misdemeanor only.”
Statement from Adams v. Elliott that was later overruled in Brown v. State
Petitioner sought review of a Fourth District Court of Appeal decision, claiming it conflicted with Adams v. Elliott, which held that doubts about whe…
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 Rule Of Lenity cases and more on FLexlaw
We are requested to review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District,1 because of an asserted conflict with an earlier decision of this Court in Adams v. Elliott,2 wherein this Court stated:
“Where a crime may be punished as a misdemeanor or as a felony, all doubts will be resolved in the defendant’s favor and the crime will be considered a misdemeanor only.”
In the recent case of Brown v. State 3 we approved and adopted the opinion of the same Fourth District Court of Appeal, which opinion is consistent with the holding of the district court in this case. In so doing we expressly receded from and overruled whatever statements in or inferences from Adams v. Elliott, supra, that were contrary to the holding of the district court in Brown, including the above statement now relied upon for conflict. That portion of Adams v. Elliott relied upon for conflict having been expressly overruled, petitioner no longer has a basis for conflict. The Petition for a Writ of Certiorari must accordingly be, and the same hereby is, denied.
It is so ordered.
THORNAL, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Adams v. Elliott, 128 Fla. 79 (Fla. 1937)
- Calloway Brown v. State, 237 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1970)
- O'Brien v. State, 234 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)