Skip to main content

Wells v. State

Citations

  • 132 So. 3d 1110

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the Florida Supreme Court lacks discretionary review over a per curiam affirmance without written opinion
  • “As in all petitions seeking this Court’s discretionary jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), we are confined to consider only those facts contained within the four corners of the district court’s majority opinion.”
  • “We therefore hold that this Court does not have discretionary jurisdiction over unelaborated per curiam dismissal from the district courts of appeal [] that are issued without opinion or explanation, whether in opinion form or by way of unpublished order[.]” (alterations added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Canady, Labarga, Lewis, Pariente, Perry, Polston, Quince

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.