State of Florida v. Michael Perez

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ______________ No. SC13-1958 ______________ STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, vs. MICHAEL PEREZ, Respondent. [October 16, 2014] PER CURIAM. Following the issuance of the Third District Court of Appeal s opinion in Perez v. State, 118 So. 3d 298 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013), and upon the State s motion, the district court certified the following question as one of great public importance: HOW SHOULD MANIFEST INJUSTICE BE DEFINED FOR PURPOSES OF A CLAIM OF NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE AFTER A GUILTY PLEA? Perez v. State, 122 So. 3d 429, 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). Initially, the Court accepted review under article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution. After further consideration, we conclude that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, this case is hereby dismissed. It is so ordered. LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, and PERRY, JJ., concur. NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ALLOWED. Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - Certified Great Public Importance Third District - Case No. 3D11-3250 (Dade County) Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Richard L. Polin, Bureau Chief, Joanne Diez, Assistant Attorney General, and Linda S. Katz, Assistant Attorney General, Miami, Florida, for Petitioner Gary L. Sasso of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Tampa, Florida, and Steven Michael Blickensderfer of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Miami, Florida, and Peter D. Webster of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt, P.A., Tallahassee, 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.