Moody v. State

Full title: KENNETH HAROLD MOODY, PETITIONER, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Court: Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Oct 2, 1997

699 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 1997)

Opinion

No. 90,014

October 2, 1997

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Direct Conflict of Decisions Second District — Case No. 96-03375 (Sarasota County).

Kenneth Harold Moody, pro se, Blountstown, Florida, for Petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; Robert J. Krauss, Senior Assistant Attorney General and Dale E. Tarpley, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Moody v. State, 696 So.2d 797 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), which expressly and directly conflicts with decisions of the Third and Fourth District Courts of Appeal. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

We quash the decision below and remand for further proceedings consistent with our opinion in State v. Hudson, 22 Fla. L. Weekly S514 (Fla. Aug. 28, 1997).

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

WELLS, J., dissents with an opinion, in which GRIMES, J., concurs.

WELLS, J., dissenting.

I must dissent for the same reasons stated in my dissent inHudson v. State, 22 Fla. L. Weekly S514 (Fla. Aug. 28, 1997).

GRIMES, J., concurs.