DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
KINGS MOTOR CENTER, VERNON W. SJODIN, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY AND DIEUSEUL LOUIS, RESPONDENTS

Fla. 4th DCA | 1983-03-09
No. 82-1261
DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and GLICK-STEIN, JJ., concur.
427 So. 2d 808 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1983) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Respondents having filed a confession of error, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the order of the circuit court entered in its appellate capacity and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings.

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and GLICK-STEIN, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Jones v. State, 508 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
    …trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting the cross-examination as to the witness Adderly. As to the witness, Steible, if error did occur it was at most harmless on this record. Knight v. State, 394 So. 2d 997 (Fla.1981); Sloan v. State, 427 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Section 924.33 Florida Statutes (1985). Therefore, for the reasons stated, the judgment, conviction and sentence be and they are hereby affirmed. Affirmed.…
  • State v. Perez (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
    …ial based on the alleged newly discovered evidence. Robinson, 711 So. 2d at 623 (reversing granting of motion for new trial because the trial court failed “to account for the abundant [ ] evidence that was presented at . . . trial”); Sloan v. State, 427 So. 2d 808, 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (finding limitation on cross-examination regarding pending charges against witness was harmless given the substantial evidence against defendant). Cross-appeal: The trial court did not err in denying Perez’s motion f…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw