Filed: Mar. 15, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 15, 2012
Summary: PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in Edenfield v. State, 45 So.3d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), 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. CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, a
Summary: PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in Edenfield v. State, 45 So.3d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), 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. CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, an..
More
PER CURIAM.
We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in Edenfield v. State, 45 So.3d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), 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.
CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.
