State v. Arriagada
STATE of Florida v. Arturo ARRIAGADA
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
OVERTON, Justice.
We have for review State v. Arriagada, 508 So.2d 1247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), in which the state sought review of a pretrial order suppressing certain identification testimony. The district court found this type of pretrial order nonreviewable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c). The district court also found that certiorari was not available as a means for review. The court acknowledged direct conflict with State v. Wilson, 483 So.2d 23 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), and certified the following as a question of great public importance.
Whether the holdings in Jones v. State, [ 477 So.2d 566 (Fla.1985)]; State v. G.P., *919 [ 476 So.2d 1272 (Fla.1985) ]; and State v. C.C., [ 476 So.2d 144 (Fla.1985) ], preclude the state from seeking common law cer-tiorari review of nonappealable interlocutory orders in criminal cases.
508 So.2d at 1248 .
We recently answered this question in the negative in State v. Pettis, 520 So.2d 250 (Fla.1988). Accordingly, we quash Ar-riagada and remand to the district court for consideration consistent with Pettis .
It is so ordered.
MCDONALD, C.J., and EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.