¶1concurring.
¶2For the reasons expressed in my concurring opinion in Odom v. State, 782 So.2d 510(Fla. 1st DCA 2001), I join in the decision to remand this case to the trial court.
783 So. 2d 333
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided April 20, 2001
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2001-04-20
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 2002
1 state decisions
Relies on 782 So. 2d 510 - Odom v. State
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2001-04-20
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1concurring.
¶2For the reasons expressed in my concurring opinion in Odom v. State, 782 So.2d 510(Fla. 1st DCA 2001), I join in the decision to remand this case to the trial court.