CAREY J. DAISEY, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF DADE, RESPONDENTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari, holding that it was not the proper procedural vehicle to review a traffic conviction affirmed by the Circuit Court. The court found that while the case involved constitutional claims, the proper appellate route was not certiorari.
No, a petition for a writ of certiorari is not the proper method to seek review of the Circuit Court's decision in this instance. The Florida Constitution provides specific appellate routes for certain cases, and certiorari is not applicable here.
“Without reaching the merits of petitioner's claims, we are forced to deny said petition for the reason that certiorari is not the proper method of obtaining review of the Circuit Court's decision here.”
Establishes the basis for denying the petition without addressing the underlying constitutional issues.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarey J. Daisey was convicted of traffic violations in the Dade-County Metropolitan Court. The conviction was affirmed on appeal to the Circuit Court …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Direct Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner was convicted in the Dade-County Metropolitan Court of certain traffic violations. On appeal to the Circuit Court of Dade County, said conviction was affirmed. It is from this affirmance that the petitioner has prosecuted the instant petition for writ of certiorari on the grounds-that:
“(a) The arrest and trial was contrary to Section 22 of the Declaration of Rights of the Constitution of the State of Florida and the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
“(b) The trial by unsworn docket entry pursuant to Section 602C supplemented by Dade County Ordinance 57— 13 is contrary to Article 3 Section 20 of the Constitution of the State of Florida.”
Without reaching the merits of petitioner’s claims, we are forced to deny said petition for the reason that certiorari is not the *701proper method of obtaining review of the Circuit Court’s decision here.
Article V, Section 4(2) of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A. provides in part:
“Appeals from trial courts may he taken directly to the supreme court, as a matter of right * * * from final judgments or decrees * * * construing a controlling provision of the Florida or federal constitution.”
We do not intend to suggest that this case could have been brought by appeal to the Supreme Court of Florida. We do not decide that question because it is not before us. We only conclude that the matter cannot be brought for our consideration upon petition for certiorari.
The petition for certiorari is hereby denied.
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, ROBERTS and DREW, JJ., concur.