Amy Hinman v. State of Florida

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida _____________ No. SC12-2501 _____________ AMY HINMAN, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [January 16, 2014] PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in State v. Hinman, 100 So. 3d 220 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012), based on express and direct conflict. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Upon further consideration, we have determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss this review proceeding. It is so ordered. POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. LEWIS, J., dissents. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED. Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal Direct Conflict of Decisions Third District Case No. 3D11-2748 (Dade County) Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, Maria E. Lauredo, Chief Assistant Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Assistant Public Defender, Miami, Florida, for Petitioner Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, Richard L. Polin, Bureau Chief Criminal Appeals, and Keri T. Josesph, Assistant Attorney General, Miami, Florida, for Respondent -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.