Cole v. State

Aug 30, 1990
Nos. 74213, 74299
Reporters:
, , ,
Before:
Barkett
PER CURIAM.

We have for review Cole v. State, 550 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), ‍‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‍based on certified conflict with Franklin v. State, 526 So.2d 159 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), or express and direct conflict with State v. Green, 547 So.2d 925 (Fla.1989). We ‍‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‍have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), (4), Fla. Const.

Since the decision below issued, we have overruled that portion of Franklin upon which conflict was certified. State v. Watts, 558 ‍‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‍So.2d 994, 1000 (Fla.1990). *1354Thus, on the interpretation of the Youthful Offender Statute, the district court’s opinion is approved. However, we quash the remainder ‍‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‍of the opinion below for reconsideration in light of Green, which the state concedes is inconsistent with the views of the district court.

It is so ‍‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‍ordered.

SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, ehrlich, barkett, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.