Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

372 So. 2d 64

Williams v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided May 3, 1979

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1979-05-03

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1989

7 state decisions

Relies on Clark v. State · 194 So. 2d 260 - Florida East Coast Railway Company v. Rouse · Schreiber Express, Inc. v. Mayo

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1979-05-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1The petition for writ of certiorari reflected probable jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and dispensed with oral argument pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.320. After careful consideration of the briefs and record, we have determined that conflict was dispelled by Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla.1978), thereby leaving this Court without jurisdiction. Accordingly, the writ must be and is hereby discharged and the petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Linder v. Combustion Engineering, Inc., 342 So.2d 474 (Fla.1977); Florida East Coast Railway v. Rouse, 194 So.2d 260 (Fla.), conformed to, 195 So.2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Weedman v. Sunland Roller Rink, Inc., 349 So.2d 752 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).

¶2It is so ordered.

ENGLAND, C. J., and BOYD, SUND-BERG, HATCHETT and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.
/372/so2d/64 · .json · Public domain