State v. Byars

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 29, 2001

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2001-08-29

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently July 2002

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“DOES A RESTRAINING ORDER ENJOINING A DEFENDANT FROM ENTERING A STRUCTURE WITHDRAW THE CONSENT ENJOYED BY MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC FROM ENTRY INTO THE STRUCTURE, THEREBY PREVENTING THE DEFENDANT FROM RAISING THE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC DEFENSE RECOGNIZED IN MILLER V. STATE, 733 So.2d 955 (Fla. 1998)?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 823 So. 2d 740 - State v. Byars

Relies on 733 So. 2d 955 - Miller v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2001-08-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ON MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF QUESTION AS ONE OF GREAT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE

WARNER, J.

¶2We grant the state’s motion for certification of the following question of great public importance. We certify the following question:

DOES A RESTRAINING ORDER ENJOINING A DEFENDANT FROM ENTERING A STRUCTURE WITHDRAW THE CONSENT ENJOYED BY MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC FROM ENTRY INTO THE STRUCTURE, THEREBY PREVENTING THE DEFENDANT FROM RAISING THE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC DEFENSE RECOGNIZED IN MILLER V. STATE, 733 So.2d 955 (Fla.1998).

¶3Although appellee argues that this court should not certify because this case does not involve a common or recurring question, we disagree. With the increase of domestic violence injunctions over the past several years, this same factual situation has the capability of being repeated often. Because of this, we conclude that it is a question of great public importance.

STEVENSON, and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.