Court Opinion

ID: 7459963
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 03:27:41.733429+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:22:47.165267
License: Public Domain

ADKINS, Justice.
We have for consideration questions from the Ninth Judicial Circuit, relating to Fla.Stat. §§ 775.08, 782.04, 921.141 (Capital Punishment), F.S.A., certified under the provisions of Fla.App.Rules, Rule 4.6, 32 F.S.A.
The above appellate rule provides certain limitations within which the question must be presented and these limitations are strictly observed. Clar v. Dade County, 116 So.2d 34 (Fla.App.3d, 1959); Hillsborough County v. Bennett, 173 So.2d 688 (Fla.1965). One of the limitations imposed is that the certified question must be without controlling precedent in Florida. Bigby v. Lykes Bros., 153 Fla. 313, 14 So.2d 565 (1943); Stanley v. Home Owners Mortgage Co., 42 So.2d 770 (Fla.1949); Jaworski v. City of Opa-Locka, 149 So.2d 566 (Fla.App.3d, 1963).
This Court in State v. Dixon, 283 So.2d 1 (Fla.1973), held that Fla.Stat. §§ 775.082, 782.04, 921.141, F.S.A., was constitutional. The request is therefore denied.
It is so ordered.
CARLTON, C. J., and BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.