Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

520 So. 2d 571

520 So.2d 571

13 Fla.L.Weekly 163

State v. Thayer

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided February 25, 1988

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1988-02-25

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 1988

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“DO THE HOLDINGS IN JONES v. STATE, 477 So.2d 566 (Fla.1985), STATE v. G.P., 476 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1985) and STATE v. C.C., 476 So.2d 144 (Fla.1985) PRECLUDE THE STATE FROM SEEKING CERTIORARI REVIEW OF NON-APPEALABLE INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS IN A CRIMINAL CASE WHERE THE STATE HAS DEMONSTRATED A CLEAR DEPARTURE FROM THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAW?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 520 So. 2d 570 - State v. Johnson

Relies on 520 So. 2d 250 - State v. Pettis · 476 So. 2d 144 - State v. C.C. · 477 So. 2d 566 - Jones v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1988-02-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We have for review State v. Thayer, 489 So.2d 782 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified the following question as one of great public importance:

DO THE HOLDINGS IN JONES v. STATE, 477 So.2d 566 (Fla.1985), STATE v. G.P., 476 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1985) AND STATE v. C.C., 476 So.2d 144 (FLA.1985) PRECLUDE THE STATE FROM SEEKING CERTIORARI REVIEW OF NON-APPEALABLE INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS IN A CRIMINAL CASE WHERE THE STATE HAS DEMONSTRATED A CLEAR DEPARTURE FROM THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAW?

¶2489 So.2d at 783. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla.Const.

¶3We recently answered the question in the negative in State v. Pettis, 520 So.2d 250 (Fla.1988). Accordingly, we quash the decision below and remand for proceedings consistent with our decision in Pettis.

¶4It is so ordered.

MCDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

¶5*572NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED.

/520/so2d/571 · .json · Public domain