Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Luis Torres Jimenez v. State of Florida, etc.

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided May 3, 2018No. SC16-1976Published

1Concurrence

CANADY, J., specially concurring.

I agree that the Third District's decision in State ex rel. City of Aventura v. Jimenez , 211 So.3d 158 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016), and the Second District's decision in City of Oldsmar v. Trinh , 210 So.3d 191 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016), should be approved, and that the Fourth District's decision in City of Hollywood v. Arem , 154 So.3d 359 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014), should be disapproved. I join in the majority's rejection of Jimenez's argument that is based on the uniformity requirement of section 316.007, Florida Statutes (2014).

I also agree that Jimenez's argument regarding…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of Hollywood, a political subdivision of the State of Florida v. Eric AremDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
  2. State Ex Rel. City of Aventura v. JimenezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
  3. City of Oldsmar v. TrinhDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API