State v. Omasta

Supreme Court of Florida February 3, 1977

State v. Omasta, 342 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 1977)

1977 Fla. LEXIS 3814

Adkins, Boyd, England, Hatchett, Karl, Overton, Sundberg

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ. Upon further consideration of the cause, we conclude that no direct conflict of decisions exists as required by Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby discharged.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, ENGLAND and KARL, JJ., concur. BOYD, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., dissent.

Reference

Full Case Name: STATE of Florida v. William R. OMASTA, Jr.
Status: Published