From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Roebuck v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
May 15, 2008
982 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 2008)

Opinion

No. SC07-807.

May 15, 2008.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Certified Direct Conflict of Decisions, First District — Case No. 1D05-2882 (Leon County).

Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, FL, for Petitioner.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Bureau Chief, and Giselle Lylen Rivera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, FL, for Respondent.


We initially accepted jurisdiction to review Roebuck v. State, 953 So.2d 40 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), a decision in which the First District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the Second District Court of Appeal's decisions in Joggers v. State, 536 So.2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), and Cliburn v. State, 710 So.2d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Upon further consideration, we have now determined that Roebuck is not in conflict with Joggers and Cliburn and that jurisdiction should be discharged. Accordingly, this review proceeding is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Roebuck v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
May 15, 2008
982 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 2008)
Case details for

Roebuck v. State

Case Details

Full title:Vincent ROEBUCK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: May 15, 2008

Citations

982 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 2008)

Citing Cases

Washington v. State

We join the First District in adhering to the rules of evidence and respectfully declining to adopt the…

Pantoja v. State

The supreme court initially accepted jurisdiction and, after a determination that there was no express…