From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barron v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Feb 21, 2008
976 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 2008)

Opinion

No. SC06-755.

February 21, 2008.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Certified Direct Conflict of Decisions, Second Districts-Case No. 2D05-4673 (Hillsborough County).

Terry Barron, Pro se, Crestview, FL, for Petitioner.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, FL, for Respondent.


We have for review Barron v. State, 931 So.2d 929 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), in which the Second District Court of Appeal certified conflict with Isaac v. State, 911 So.2d 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction filed, No. SC05-2047 (Fla. Oct.31, 2005). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)( 4), Fla. Const.

We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition of Galindez v. State, 955 So.2d 517 (Fla. 2007), which we ultimately decided on harmless error grounds based on a thorough review of the record. We thereafter issued an order directing petitioner to show cause why our Galindez decision should not control the outcome of the present case. However, petitioner's response does not contain enough information or record attachments for us to perform a Galindez harmless error analysis. Moreover, we cannot unilaterally perform such an analysis, as the record is not before this Court.

We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case. The decision under review is quashed and this matter is remanded to the Second District Court for application of a harmless error analysis based on our decision in Galindez and a thorough review of the record.

It is so ordered.

LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Barron v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Feb 21, 2008
976 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 2008)
Case details for

Barron v. State

Case Details

Full title:Terry BARRON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Feb 21, 2008

Citations

976 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 2008)