 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur v. State4/26/2002
recede from that holding. Rather, the court acknowledged that if Sylvester spoke to DWLS under 322.34(5), as the Fourth District Court of Appeal believed, see Rodgers v. State, 804 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), then it would align itself with the Fourth District. The statute at issue in Sylvester was not section 322.34(5), but rather section 322.34(2), as the present opinion clarifies. Therefore, the Fields opinion supports, rather than conflicts, with the holding of Sylvester. At this point in time, no appellate court conflicts with Sylvester as properly understood, and one appellate court has agreed with the holding of Sylvester. By virtue of the majority's disavowance of Sylvester, conflict jurisdiction appears to exist for the supreme court to tell us what the correct answer is.
Page 1 2 3 4 Florida DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|