PAYTON v. STATE (1999)

Supreme Court of Florida.

Bruce E. PAYTON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 93,653.

Decided: February 25, 1999

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and A. Victoria Wiggins, Assistant Public Defender, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Bartow, Florida, for Petitioner. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Robert J. Krauss, Tampa Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals, and Johnny T. Salgado, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, for Respondent.

We have for review the decision in Payton v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1817, 732 So.2d 1086 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), which the district court certified to be in conflict with the opinions in Waite v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 681 So.2d 901 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), and Schultz v. State, 700 So.2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), approved, 720 So.2d 247 (Fla.1998). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.

The district court below held that an order withholding adjudication without imposing probation is not an appealable order. In State v. Schultz, 720 So.2d 247 (Fla.1998), this Court held that an order withholding adjudication of guilt without placing the defendant on probation is appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, we quash the decision of the district court below and remand this case for proceedings consistent with our opinion in Schultz.

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J.

SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law