green
Positive treatment
2.8 score
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Carino v. State
State v. Carino, 625 So.2d 1215, 1215 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (incorporating questions previously certified in State v. Nevadomski, 619 So.2d 310, 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) and State v. Rochelle, 609 So.2d 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), review dismissed sub nom., Comrey v. State, 617 So.2d 318 (Fla. 1993)).
STATE of Florida
v.
Russell CARINO, and David Rushing
v.
Russell CARINO, and David Rushing
No. 92-0469.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Mar 10, 1993.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Melynda L. Melear, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant., Rhonda L. Rogers, Rhonda L. Rogers, P.A., Hollywood, for appellee Carino., Richard L. Rosenbaum, Law Offices of Richard L. Rosenbaum, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Rushing.
Anstead, Glickstein, Hersey.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Having accepted jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.160, this court reverses the suppression order that was presented in this appeal for review, and remands the case to the trial court. See State v. Rochelle, 609 So.2d 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
ON MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION
We grant the motion and certify as questions of great public importance those certified in State v. Nevadomski, 619 So.2d 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).
GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and ANSTEAD, J., concur.
HERSEY, J., dissents without opinion.