Opinion
No. 2D12–1842.
2012-11-28
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, Petitioner, v. Cynthia RAMNARINE, Respondent.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for the Twelfth Judicial Circuit for Sarasota County; sitting in its appellate capacity. Stephen D. Hurm, General Counsel, and Damaris E. Reynolds, Assistant General Counsel, Lake Worth, for Petitioner. Darren Finebloom of Finebloom, Haenel & Higgins, P.A., Sarasota, for Respondent.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for the Twelfth Judicial Circuit for Sarasota County; sitting in its appellate capacity.
Stephen D. Hurm, General Counsel, and Damaris E. Reynolds, Assistant General Counsel, Lake Worth, for Petitioner. Darren Finebloom of Finebloom, Haenel & Higgins, P.A., Sarasota, for Respondent.
Prior Report: ––– So.3d ––––. BLACK, Judge.
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied. See Dep't of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Robinson, 93 So.3d 1090 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), petition for review filed,No. SC12–1874 (Fla. Sept. 5, 2012). However, as we did in Robinson, we certify the following question of great public importance to the supreme court pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(v):
WHEN A SUSPENDEE SEEKS FORMAL REVIEW OF A DRIVER'S LICENSE SUSPENSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 322.2615(a), FLORIDA STATUTES, IS IT A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS TO SUSPEND THE LICENSE AFTER A SUBPOENAED WITNESS FAILS TO APPEAR AND THE SUSPENDEE CANNOT ENFORCE THE SUBPOENA WITHIN THE STATUTORILY MANDATED THIRTY–DAY PERIOD FOR FORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW?