Case Name: Russell Ambler MAGUIRE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-02-27
Citations: 594 So. 2d 306
Docket Number: No. 78849
Parties: Russell Ambler MAGUIRE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Judges: SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, barkett, grimes, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 594
Pages: 306–306

Head Matter:
Russell Ambler MAGUIRE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 78849.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Feb. 27, 1992.
Aubrey O. Dicus, Jr. and Margie I. Fra-ley of Battaglia, Ross, Hastings and Dicus, A Professional Association, St. Petersburg, for petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Michele Taylor, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We review Maguire v. State, 586 So.2d 1268 (Fla. 2d D.C.A.1991), in which the district court of appeal certified the following as a question of great public importance:
DOES A SECOND VIOLATION OF PROBATION CONSTITUTE A VALID BASIS FOR A DEPARTURE SENTENCE BEYOND THE ONE-CELL DEPARTURE PROVIDED IN THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES?
Id. at 1268. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.
Though phrased in a different manner, this question has been answered negatively in our recent opinion in Williams v. State, 594 So.2d 273 (Fla.1992). We quash the decision below to the extent that it conflicts with that opinion and remand the case for disposition consistent with that opinion.
It is ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, barkett, grimes, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.