Roebuck v. State
| Decision Date | 15 May 2008 |
| Docket Number | No. SC07-807.,SC07-807. |
| Citation | 982 So.2d 683 |
| Parties | Vincent ROEBUCK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, FL, for Petitioner.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Bureau Chief, and Giselle Lylen Rivera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, FL, for Respondent.
We initially accepted jurisdiction to review Roebuck v. State, 953 So.2d 40 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), a decision in which the First District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the Second District Court of Appeal's decisions in Jaggers v. State, 536 So.2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), and Cliburn v. State, 710 So.2d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Upon further consideration, we have now determined that Roebuck is not in conflict with Jaggers and Cliburn and that jurisdiction should be discharged. Accordingly, this review proceeding is dismissed.
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kovaleski v. State
...had actually lent to a friend, had been stolen. We relied on Roebuck v. State, 953 So.2d 40 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), review dismissed, 982 So.2d 683 (Fla.2008), which held that, under our evidence code, the credibility of a witness may not be attacked by proof of a specific act of misconduct wh......
-
Pantoja v. State
...accepted jurisdiction and, after a determination that there was no express conflict, dismissed the review proceedings. Roebuck v. State, 982 So.2d 683, 683 (Fla. 2008). While the supreme court did not explain its determination of no conflict, we recognize several potential reasons for the d......
-
Washington v. State
...the appeal, concluding that Roebuck is not in conflict with Jaggers and Cliburn and that jurisdiction should be discharged. 982 So.2d 683 (Fla. 2008). ...