State v. Myers

Full title: STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT, v. GARY MYERS, OSVALDO BURGOS, ASISCLO…

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Nov 17, 1994

644 So. 2d 535 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

Opinion

Nos. 93-0116, 93-0308, 93-0512, 93-0513, 93-0607, 93-0782, 93-0824, 93-0868, 93-1820 and 93-1049.

September 28, 1994. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied November 17, 1994.

Consolidated appeals and certified questions from the County Courts for Broward and Palm Beach Counties; Ronald J. Rothschild and Robert S. Schwartz, Judges.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, John Tiedemann and James J. Carney, Asst. Attys. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Jeffrey A. Miller, Boca Raton, for appellee Gary Myers.

Bonnie M. Willis, West Palm Beach, for appellee — Osvaldo Burgos.

Richard L. Rosenbaum of Law Offices of Richard L. Rosenbaum, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee — Asisclo Munguia.

John G. George of John G. George, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees — David Marks and Laura Hand.

Jack A. Fleischman of Fleischman Fleischman, Palm Beach, for appellees — Gregory McDonald and Robert Frankel.

Eric Dorsky of Eric Dorsky, P.A., Davie, for appellee — David Cypress.

Gary S. Ostrow of Law Office of Gary S. Ostrow, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee — Marc A. Foucher.

Gary T. Lazarus of Gary T. Lazarus, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee — Deborah H. Fleischman.

Nancy C. Wear of Essen Essen, P.A., North Miami Beach, for appellee — Terry Bharraatsingh.

STEVENSON, Judge.

We sua sponte consolidate these related appeals. In each case, the trial court certified at least one of the following questions as being of great public importance:

WHETHER THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSE BARS TRIAL OF AN OFFENDER ON A CRIMINAL TRAFFIC OFFENSE WHERE THE OFFENDER HAS PREVIOUSLY ENTERED A PLEA OF GUILTY OR NO CONTEST TO A TRAFFIC INFRACTION ON WHICH THE STATE WILL RELY TO PROVE AN ELEMENT OF THE CRIMINAL TRAFFIC OFFENSE?

WHETHER THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY CLAUSE BARS TRIAL ON AN OFFENDER WHO HAS PREVIOUSLY HAD HIS DRIVING PRIVILEGES SUSPENDED PURSUANT TO § 322.2615?

We accepted jurisdiction pursuant to rule 9.160, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Based upon our decision in the recently decided case, State v. Murray, 644 So.2d 533 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), we answer the certified questions in the negative. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for proceedings not inconsistent with the Murray opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

DELL, C.J., and HERSEY, J., concur.