Case Name: STATE OF FLORIDA v. FINGAR
Court: Florida Circuit Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-02-01
Citations: 45 Fla. Supp. 2d 71
Docket Number: Case No. 90-089 AC
Parties: STATE OF FLORIDA v FINGAR
Judges: 
Reporter: Florida Supplement Second
Volume: 45
Pages: 71–73

Head Matter:
STATE OF FLORIDA v FINGAR
Case No. 90-089 AC
Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Dade County
February 1, 1991
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Avi Litwin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.
Michael Brodsky, Esquire, for appellee.
Before HENDERSON, ROBINSON, KAHN, JJ.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM.
We feel bound to follow the clear precedent contained in Zink v State, 448 So.2d 1196 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), because we feel it is the law and because of the reasons controlling our discretion expressed in State v Hayes, 333 So.2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976. By saying "within the state," Section 316.193(l)(a), Florida Statutes, applies driving under the influence laws to both public and private property. Section 316.006, Florida Statutes, including its remedial 1987 amendment, limits juris diction of county police over private property in their enforcement of laws controlling traffic to situations when the property owner consents. However, that section in no way is a limitation on the specific jurisdiction given the police in § 316.193(l)(a).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
ROBINSON and KAHN, JJ., concur. HENDERSON, J., dissents with opinion.