Legal Opinion · Dissent

Pruitt v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 30, 1996No. 94-2876Published

1DissentGersten, Judge

I respectfully dissent. I would deny cer-tiorari because the trial court properly exercised its discretion in sentencing the defendant to ninety days incarceration. Absent a departure from the essential requirements of law, there are no grounds, other than second guessing a trial court, to grant certiorari.

Certiorari is an extraordinary remedy and a petition should only be granted where there is a clear violation of an established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice. Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93 (Fla.1983). See Conahan v. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Combs v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1983
  2. Conahan v. DEPT. OF HWY. SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLESDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
  3. State v. ShawDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
  4. American Southern Co. v. Tinter, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  5. Fla. Sheriffs'self-Ins. Fund v. Escambia Cty.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API