Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

699 So. 2d 1009

Docket No. 90014.

Moody v. State

Kenneth Harold MOODY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided October 2, 1997.

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1997-10-02

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently January 2002

7 state decisions

Relies on 698 So. 2d 831 - State v. Hudson · Moody v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1997-10-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Kenneth Harold Moody, Blountstown, Pro Se.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; Robert J. Krauss, Senior Assistant Attorney General and Dale E. Tarpley, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Respondent.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4We have for review Moody v. State,696 So.2d 797 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), which expressly and directly conflicts with decisions of the Third and Fourth District Courts of Appeal. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

¶5We quash the decision below and remand for further proceedings consistent with our opinion in State v. Hudson,698 So.2d 831 (Fla.1997).

¶6KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

¶7WELLS, J., dissents with an opinion, in which GRIMES, J., concurs.

¶8WELLS, Justice, dissenting.

¶9I must dissent for the same reasons stated in my dissent in State v. Hudson,698 So.2d 831 (Fla.1997).

¶10GRIMES, J., concurs.

/699/so2d/1009 · .json · Public domain