State v. Maugeri

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Michael MAUGERI, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 19, 1990.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1990-12-19

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently October 1991

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“DOES AN AGREEMENT UNDER SECTION 893.135(4) AS AMENDED, WHEREBY A CONVICTED DRUG TRAFFICKER WILL RECEIVE A SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED SENTENCE IN EXCHANGE FOR SETTING UP NEW DRUG DEALS, VIOLATE THE HOLDING IN STATE V GLOSSON, 462 So.2d 1082 (Fla.1985)?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 589 So. 2d 896 - State v. Maugeri

Relies on 462 So. 2d 1082 - State v. Glosson · Hunter v. State · State v. Anders

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1990-12-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Miles Ferris, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

¶2Richard F. Rendina, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

¶3LETTS, Judge.

¶4This cause is affirmed on the authority of State v. Anders,560 So.2d 288 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).

¶5Notwithstanding our decision here, we are not unaware of the question we certified in Hunter v. State,531 So.2d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), nearly two years ago, as yet unanswered. We, therefore, certify the question again adding the additional language which we emphasize:

DOES AN AGREEMENT UNDER SECTION 893.135(4) AS AMENDED, WHEREBY A CONVICTED DRUG TRAFFICKER WILL RECEIVE A SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED SENTENCE IN EXCHANGE FOR SETTING UP NEW DRUG DEALS, VIOLATE THE HOLDING IN STATE V. GLOSSON,462 So.2d 1082 (Fla. 1985)?

¶6AFFIRMED.

¶7DOWNEY J., and McNULTY, JOSEPH P., (Retired), Associate Judge, concur.