From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holland v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Aug 18, 2021
326 So. 3d 1172 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2021)

Opinion

No. 1D21-1563

08-18-2021

Mitchell HOLLAND, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Mitchell Holland, pro se, Petitioner. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.


Mitchell Holland, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The Court denies the petition for writ of prohibition on the merits. See Topps v. State , 865 So. 2d 1253, 1258 (Fla. 2004) (explaining that a decision on an extraordinary writ petition that "clearly shows that the issue was considered by the court on the merits" is deemed a decision "which would later bar the litigant from presenting the issue under the doctrines of res judicata or collateral estoppel").

Lewis, Osterhaus, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Holland v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Aug 18, 2021
326 So. 3d 1172 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2021)
Case details for

Holland v. State

Case Details

Full title:Mitchell HOLLAND, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Date published: Aug 18, 2021

Citations

326 So. 3d 1172 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2021)