Title: State of Florida v. Andrea Smith

State: florida

Issuer: Florida Supreme Court

Document:

Supreme 
Court 
of 
Florida
 
____________
No. SC96974
____________
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Petitioner,
vs.
ANDREA SMITH,
Respondent.
[July 6, 2000]
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the opinion in State v. Smith, 753 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 4th DCA
1999), which the district court certified to be in conflict with the opinion of the Third
District in McKnight v. State, 727 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), in which the Third
District had, in turn, certified conflict with State v. Cotton, 728 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1998).  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.
We recently quashed the Second District’s decision in Cotton, and approved
the First District's decision in Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999),
-2-
holding that the Act, as properly interpreted by the First District, does not violate
separation of powers, and rejecting other constitutional challenges to the Act.  See
State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281 (Fla. June 15, 2000).  Accordingly, for
the reasons expressed in Cotton, we quash the Fourth District’s decision in this case
with directions to remand the cause to the trial court for proceedings consistent with
this opinion.
It is so ordered.
WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ.,
concur.
QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF
FILED, DETERMINED.
QUINCE, J., dissenting.
I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996
& SC95281 (Fla. June 15, 2000).
Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - 
Direct Conflict
Fourth District - Case No. 4D98-2894 
(Palm Beach County)
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Celia A. Terenzio, Bureau Chief, Palm
-3-
Beach Office, and Don M. Rogers, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach,
Florida,
for Petitioner
Mark Wilensky of Dubiner & Wilensky, P.A., West Palm Beach, Florida,
for Respondent