Filed: Jan. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Jan. 16, 2014
Summary: PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in State v. Hinman, 100 So.3d 220 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012), based on express and direct conflict. See art. V, 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Upon further consideration, we have determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss this review proceeding. It is so ordered. POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY,
Summary: PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in State v. Hinman, 100 So.3d 220 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012), based on express and direct conflict. See art. V, 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Upon further consideration, we have determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss this review proceeding. It is so ordered. POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, ..
More
PER CURIAM.
We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in State v. Hinman, 100 So.3d 220 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012), based on express and direct conflict. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Upon further consideration, we have determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss this review proceeding.
It is so ordered.
POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.
LEWIS, J., dissents.
