Dep't of State v. Hollander
Decision Date | 25 October 2018 |
Docket Number | No. SC18-1367,No. SC18-1366,SC18-1366,SC18-1367 |
Citation | 256 So.3d 1300 |
Parties | DEPARTMENT OF STATE, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Lee HOLLANDER, etc., et al., Appellees. Department of State, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Amy Knowles, Appellee. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Karen A. Brodeen, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Amit Agarwal, Solicitor General, Edward M. Wenger, Chief Deputy Solicitor General, and Jordan E. Pratt, Deputy Solicitor General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellant Department of State and Secretary of State
Barry Richard of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellant Marsy's Law for Florida, LLC
Mark Herron and S. Denay Brown of Messer Caparello, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellees Lee Hollander, Patricia Brigham, and the League of Women Voters of Florida, Inc.
Harvey J. Sepler of Rimon, P.C., Coral Gables, Florida, for Appellee Amy Knowles
Philip J. Padovano and Thomas J. Seider of Brannock & Humphries, on behalf of The Criminal Law Section of The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida, for Amicus Curiae The Criminal Law Section of The Florida Bar
Justin F. Karpf and Barbara J. Busharis, Assistant Public Defenders, Second Judicial Circuit, on behalf of The Florida Public Defenders Association, Tallahassee, Florida; Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., on behalf of Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Tallahassee Florida; Seth Miller, on behalf of Innocence Project of Florida, Inc., Tallahassee, Florida; Nancy Abudu and Kara Gross, on behalf of American Civil Liberties Foundation of Florida, Miami, Florida, for Amici Curiae The Florida Public Defender Association, The Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, The Innocence Project of Florida, and the American Civil Liberties Foundation of Florida
The Florida Department of State, Secretary of State Ken Detzner, and Marsy's Law of Florida, LLC appeal a judgment of the circuit court invalidating and enjoining the Constitutional Revision Commission's (CRC) Revision 1, designated as Amendment 6 and titled "Rights of Crime Victims; Judges," from placement on the ballot. The First District Court of Appeal certified the judgment to be of great public importance and to require immediate resolution.1 Because it has not been clearly and conclusively demonstrated that the ballot title and summary are misleading and do not reasonably inform voters of the chief purpose of the proposal, we reverse the circuit court's judgment and vacate the injunction.2
Amendment 6 would amend section 16 of article I, amend section 8 of article V, add section 21 to article V, and add a new section to article XII of the Florida Constitution. Specifically, the CRC's proposal is as follows, with the additions underlined and the deletions stricken:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re Amendments to the Fla. Rules of Appellate Procedure—2017 Regular-Cycle Report
... ... such research indicated that appeals to the circuit court are handled differently across the state—some circuits, for example the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits, require that most or all appeals be ... ...
-
City of Tallahassee v. Fla. Police Benevolent Ass'n
...and the League of Women Voters filed complaints in the circuit court arguing that the ballot title and summary were misleading. In Hollander, we rejected these consolidated holding that the ballot title and summary reasonably informed voters of the chief purpose and effect of Amendment 6. I......