Vincent Parrish v. State of Florida

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC00-878 ____________ VINCENT PARRISH, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [June 7, 2001] PER CURIAM. We have for review Parrish v. State, 760 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), wherein the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the Second District s decision in Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), approved, 750 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1999), on the issue of standing to challenge chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, as violative of the single subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. Based on our decision in Salters v. State, 758 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2000), and the State s confession of error, we quash the decision below to the extent that it is inconsistent with Salters, and remand to the district court for reconsideration in light of our opinions in Salters and State v. Thompson, 750 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1999). It is so ordered. SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur. WELLS, C.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 Certified Direct Conflict Fourth District - Case No. 4D97-4409 (Broward County) Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Joseph R. Chloupek, Assistant Public Defender, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, Florida, for Petitioner Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Celia Terenzio, Bureau Chief, and Joseph A. Tringali, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, 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.