McIntosh v. State
| Decision Date | 21 August 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 67819,67819 |
| Citation | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 434,496 So.2d 120 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 434 John McINTOSH, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender and Jeffrey L. Anderson, Asst. Public Defender, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, for petitioner.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Robert S. Jaegers, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.
We have for review State v. McIntosh, 475 So.2d 973 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), which directly and expressly conflicts with this Court's decisions in Jones v. State, 477 So.2d 566 (Fla.1985), and State v. C.C., 476 So.2d 144 (Fla.1985). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.
The trial court entered a pretrial order holding that a minor witness was incompetent to testify against McIntosh which the state appealed. The district court determined that the state had no direct right of appeal, treated the appeal as a petition for certiorari, and overturned the order.
McIntosh contends that because the district court found that the state had no right to directly appeal the pretrial order, * it was without authority to afford review by way of certiorari. We agree.
In C.C., 476 So.2d at 146, we held that the state is entitled to interlocutory review only in those cases where an appeal may be taken as a matter of right. In State v. G.P., 476 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1985), we held that no right of review by certiorari exists in the absence of a right of appeal. See also Jones, 477 So.2d at 566 ().
Accordingly, we quash the decision below on the authority of C.C., G.P., and Jones.
It is so ordered.
* Whether the district court's determination in this regard is correct is not before us.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Griffin v. State
...occurred. See Stincer, 107 S.Ct. at 2666; State v. McIntosh, 475 So.2d 973 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), decision quashed on other grounds in 496 So.2d 120 (Fla.1986); Morey, Competency of Child Victim, 40 U.Miami L.Rev. at 262. In the instant case, apparently on the basis of the de minimis competen......
-
State v. Brea
...is not precluded from seeking review of interlocutory orders by common law certiorari. In view of Pettis, the rationale of McIntosh v. State, 496 So.2d 120 (Fla.1986), is no longer viable. Accordingly, we quash the decision below. We express no opinion on the issue of whether acquittal of t......
-
State v. Arriagada
...petition for certiorari, as was done in Smith. We must decline to grant the relief requested upon the recent authority of McIntosh v. State, 496 So.2d 120 (Fla.1986). In McIntosh, the trial court ruled that a minor witness was incompetent to testify against the defendant, and suppressed the......
-
State v. Katiba
...on a petition by the state for writ of certiorari seeking to quash an order granting a motion in limine. It is clear from McIntosh v. State, 496 So.2d 120 (Fla.1986), and Jones v. State, 477 So.2d 566 (Fla.1985), that the Florida Supreme Court has abolished certiorari as a remedy available ......