Case Name: Leroy PEARSON, Petitioner, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Respondent
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1999-09-29
Citations: 741 So. 2d 635
Docket Number: No. 98-2006
Parties: Leroy PEARSON, Petitioner, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Respondent.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and FLETCHER and SHEVIN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 741
Pages: 635–635

Head Matter:
Leroy PEARSON, Petitioner, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Respondent.
No. 98-2006.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Sept. 29, 1999.
Leroy Pearson, in proper person.
Robert A. Ginsburg, County Attorney, and David Stephen Hope, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and FLETCHER and SHEVIN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Wé treat the notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari to review an opinion of the Circuit Court Appellate Division. We deny certiorari as the opinion does not depart from the essential requirements of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice. Haines City Comm. Dev. v. Heggs, 658 So.2d 523 (Fla.1995). A courtesy warning is not required where there has been a repeat violation or. "the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, or welfare ." § 162.21(3)(b), Fla. Stat. (1997).
Certiorari denied.