United States v. Dahlberg
United States v. Dahlberg
Opinion of the Court
A motion has been made to quash this appeal from a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District,
Our jurisdiction in appeals from the district courts is limited to those decisions which initially pass on the validity of a state statute, or Federal statute or treaty or initially construe a controlling provision of the State or Federal Constitution.
In its brief in opposition to the motion to quash the United States argues that the 'appeal “presents several important and substantial questions for decision by this Court.” Even if it does — a doubtful premise by the record — it cannot confer jurisdiction. It is also asserted that the questioned decision passes on the validity of a state statute. We do not find this to be the case, but if it did, we would not have jurisdiction because of the requirement of the Constitution that, in order to be entitled to appeal, such court must have initially passed upon such statutp. Again, the government says' the case is clearly reviewable by cer-
For these several reasons the appeal is quashed.
. United States v. Dahlberg, Fla.App. 1959, 115 So.2d 86.
. Fla.Const. Art. V, Sec. 4(2), 26 F.S.A.; F.A.R. 2.1, subd. a(5) (b), 31 F.S.A.
. Susco Car Rental System of Florida v. Leonard, Fla.1959, 112 So.2d 832.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- United States v. Gilda DAHLBERG, as of the Estate of Bror Gustave Dahlberg
- Status
- Published