Case Name: STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Hoyt Vernon HARRISON, a/k/a James Harrison, Sr., and Patricia Wolack, Respondents
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1983-12-14
Citations: 442 So. 2d 389
Docket Number: No. 83-88
Parties: STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Hoyt Vernon HARRISON, a/k/a James Harrison, Sr., and Patricia Wolack, Respondents.
Judges: HERSEY, HURLEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 442
Pages: 389–389

Head Matter:
STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Hoyt Vernon HARRISON, a/k/a James Harrison, Sr., and Patricia Wolack, Respondents.
No. 83-88.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Dec. 14, 1983.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Max Rudmann, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for petitioner.
J. David Bogenschutz of Varón & Stahl, P.A., Hollywood, for respondent Harrison.
Robert M. Leen of Leen and Schneider, Hollywood, for respondent Patricia Wolack.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Based upon the authority of Novo v. Scott, 438 So.2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA, 1983) we grant the state's petition for certiorari and quash the trial court's order which held that section 914.04, Florida Statutes (Supp.1982) is unconstitutional. We adopt the rationale of our sister court and "hold that section 914.04 is constitutional and affords a witness derivative-use immunity." Novo v. Scott, supra.
HERSEY, HURLEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.