MAURICE ANTONIO MANN, ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
CHIEF JUDGE OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
[*1185] PER CURIAM.
We review orders denying attacks on the jurisdiction of the drug division of the criminal court created by Administrative Order of the Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit dated January 15, 1997. Review of these orders was initiated in the Second District Court of Appeal, but that court certified them to be of great public importance and to require immediate resolution by this Court. We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(5) of the Florida Constitution.
The petitioners contend that the drug division could only be established by local rule approved by this Court in accordance with article V, section 20(c)(10) of the Florida Constitution. To the contrary, we conclude that the drug division was properly created by administrative order. Despite its characterization as a division, we find that the drug court is more properly viewed as a specialized section or subdivision of the criminal division of the circuit court. See Administrative Order, Fourth Judicial Circuit (Division of Courts), 378 So. 2d 286, 286 (Fla.1979) (“[Ejection 20(e)(10) of article V only requires the establishment of subject matter divisions, i.e., criminal, civil, juvenile, probate, and traffic-”). To require every specialized section of the major subject-matter divisions of a court to be approved by local rule would place too great a burden upon the efficient administration of justice.
The petitions are denied.
It is so ordered.
KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
1-888-Traffic Schs. v. Chief Circuit Judge, 734 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1999)…n challenging administrative order as an attempt to legislate). Although the First District Court in this case and the Second District Court, in Mann v. Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, 693 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA),2 on certification, 696 So. 2d 1184 (Fla.1997), have read the Wild decision as abolishing this long-standing mechanism for challenging routine administrative orders,3 such was not this Court’s [*416] intent. In fact, in Mann v. Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, 696 So. 2…1 / 2
-
Physicians Healthcare Plans, Inc. v. Pfeifler, 846 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 2003)…rule and approved by this Court. However, this Court has approved the creation of a drug “division” of the criminal court created by administrative order in the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit. See Mann v. Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, 696 So. 2d 1184 (Fla.1997). As this Court explained, despite its characterization as a division, the drug court was “more properly viewed as a specialized section or subdivision of the criminal division of the circuit court.” Id. at 1185. In Mann, we cited our prev…1 / 2
-
Heaton v. State, 711 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…ordance with article V, section 20(c)(1) of the Florida Constitution, rather than by administrative order. Subsequent to this court’s decisions in Hartley and Butler, the supreme court decided Mann v. Chief Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, 696 So. 2d 1184 (Fla.1997). In Mann, the supreme court concluded that the drug division of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit was properly created by administrative order rather than by local rule since that “division” was more appropriately viewed as a specialized se…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Administrative Order, 378 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 1979)