Thomas v. State

Full title: Steven Ray THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court: Florida Court of Appeals, First District

Date published: Mar 9, 1990

15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 676 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 676

Opinion

558 So.2d 129 (Fla.App. 1 Dist. 1990) 15 Fla. L. Weekly D 676 Steven Ray THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 89-993. Florida Court of Appeals, First District. March 9, 1990

       Rehearing Denied April 10, 1990.

       An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County; Clinton Foster, Judge.

       Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, Michael J. Minerva, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

       Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Gypsy Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

       PER CURIAM.

       AFFIRMED. Poore v. State, 531 So.2d 161 (Fla.1988).

       SHIVERS, C.J., and JOANOS, J., concur.

       ZEHMER, J., specially concurs, with opinion.

       ZEHMER, Judge, specially concurring.

       This case involves the same issue and argument on behalf of the appellant as that presented to this court in Glass v. State, 556 So.2d 465 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). For the reasons set forth in the Glass opinion, I concur in the affirmance of this case on the authority of Poore v. State, 531 So.2d 161 (Fla.1988). This same argument has been presented in numerous other cases appealed to this court, three of which have been considered and decided by this panel this week. Therefore, I consider the question presented is one of great public importance that should be settled by the supreme court. I would, therefore, certify the same question that was certified in Glass:

DOES A DOUBLE JEOPARDY VIOLATION RESULT FROM THE IMPOSITION OF A PROBATIONARY SPLIT SENTENCE WHEN THE LEGISLATURE HAS NOT EXPLICITLY AUTHORIZED THAT DISPOSITION IN THE SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES OF SECTION 921.187, FLORIDA STATUTES?