Ellis v. State

Decision Date06 July 2000
Docket NumberNo. SC96551.,SC96551.
Citation762 So.2d 912
PartiesJohn W. ELLIS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Mark A. Gruwell, Sarasota, Florida, for Petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Robert J. Krauss, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and John M. Klawikofsky, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the decision in Ellis v. State, 740 So.2d 1215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), in which the Second District certified conflict with Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We recently approved the First District's decision in Woods, holding that the Prisoner Releasee Reoffender Act, as properly interpreted by the First District, does not violate separation of powers, and rejecting other constitutional challenges to the Act. See State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281, ___ So.2d ___, 2000 WL 766521 (Fla. June 15, 2000). Accordingly, for the reasons expressed in Cotton, we quash the Second District's decision in this case to the extent that it may be interpreted as construing the Act in a manner which is inconsistent with our decision in Cotton. We approve the Second District's rejection of petitioner's challenge to the Act based upon the lack of a statutory notice requirement. See State v. Beasley, 580 So.2d 139, 142 (Fla.1991)

(observing that, "[a]s to notice, publication in the Laws of Florida or the Florida Statutes gives all citizens constructive notice of the consequences of their actions"). We decline to address the other issues raised in this case. See Heuss v. State, 687 So.2d 823, 824 (Fla.1996).

It is so ordered.

WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion.

QUINCE, J., dissenting.

I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281, ___ So.2d ___, 2000 WL 766521 (Fla. June 15, 2000).

To continue reading

Request your trial
105 cases
  • Sult v. State, SC03-542.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • June 23, 2005
    ...way authorized to use the official uniform and is presumed to know the prohibition against unauthorized use. See, e.g., Ellis v. State, 762 So.2d 912, 912 (Fla.2000) (recognizing that publication in the Laws of Florida or the Florida Statutes gives all citizens constructive notice of the co......
  • American Home Assur. v. PLAZA MATERIALS
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 7, 2005
    ...So.2d 2, 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966). More generally, the public is on constructive notice of statutory requirements. See, e.g., Ellis v. State, 762 So.2d 912, 912 (Fla.2000) (recognizing that publication in the Laws of Florida or the Florida Statutes gives all citizens constructive notice of the ......
  • Harris v. State, 2D16–817.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • August 3, 2016
    ...District.Aug. 3, 2016.Gregory T. Harris, pro se.PER CURIAM.Affirmed. See State v. Matthews, 891 So.2d 479 (Fla.2004) ; Ellis v. State, 762 So.2d 912 (Fla.2000) ; Hughes v. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ; Ward v. State, 946 So.2d 33 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) ; O'Neal v. State, 862 So.2d 91......
  • Couran v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • September 10, 2014
    ...pro se.OpinionPER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 812.13(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000) ; State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345 (Fla.2000) ; Ellis v. State, 762 So.2d 912 (Fla.2000) ; Leeman v. State, 357 So.2d 703 (Fla.1978) ; Hughes v. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ; Henry v. State, 933 So.2d 28 (Fla......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT