Case Name: STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Richard ANDERS, et al., Respondents
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-09-19
Citations: 587 So. 2d 455
Docket Number: No. 76050
Parties: STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Richard ANDERS, et al., Respondents.
Judges: SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, barkett, grimes, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 587
Pages: 455–455

Head Matter:
STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Richard ANDERS, et al., Respondents.
No. 76050.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Sept. 19, 1991.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 4, 1991.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and John Tiedemann, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for petitioner.
Pamela I. Perry of Bierman, Shohat & Loewy, P.A., Miami, and Frank A. Rubino, Coconut Grove, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We review State v. Anders, 560 So.2d 288 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified the following questions as being of great public importance:
Does an agreement whereby a convicted drug trafficker will receive a substantially reduced sentence in exchange for setting up new drug deals and testifying for the state violate the holding in State v. Glosson [, 462 So.2d 1082 (Fla.1985)]? Assuming the existence of a due process violation under Glosson, does Glosson ⅛ holding extend to a codefendant who was not the direct target of the government's agent?
Id. at 290 n. 3, 293. We recently addressed these issues in State v. Hunter, 586 So.2d 319- (Fla.1991), and accordingly, we vacate the judgment below and remand this case to the district court for reconsideration in light of Hunter.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, barkett, grimes, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.