Case Name: STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Curtis Lee McCRAY, Respondent; Curtis Lee McCRAY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-10-28
Citations: 626 So. 2d 654
Docket Number: Nos. 80966, 81035
Parties: STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Curtis Lee McCRAY, Respondent. Curtis Lee McCRAY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Judges: BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, shaw, grimes, kogan and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 626
Pages: 654–654

Head Matter:
STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Curtis Lee McCRAY, Respondent. Curtis Lee McCRAY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Nos. 80966, 81035.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Oct. 28, 1993.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., James W. Rogers, Bureau Chief, Crim. Appeals, and Charlie McCoy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for petitioner, cross-respondent.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Lynn A. Williams, Asst. Public Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, for respondent, cross-petitioner.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We have for review McCray v. State, 609 So.2d 159 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), in which the district court certified a question of great public importance. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We answered the certified question in State v. Johnson, 616 So.2d 1 (Fla.1993). On the authority of Johnson, we approve the decision under review. It is not necessary to discuss the issues raised by the cross-petition.
It is so ordered.
BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, shaw, grimes, kogan and HARDING, JJ., concur.