Hugo Miranda v. State of Florida

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC14-888 ____________ HUGO MIRANDA, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [January 14, 2016] PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review the decision of the Third District Court of Appeal in State v. Miranda, 137 So. 3d 1133 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014), based on express and direct conflict. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. After further consideration, we conclude that jurisdiction was improvidently granted. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss this review proceeding. 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 - Direct Conflict of Decisions Third District - Case Nos. 3D12-269 & 3D12-270 (Miami-Dade County) Carlos Jesus Martinez, Public Defender, and John Eddy Morrison, Assistant Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami, Florida, for Petitioner Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida; Richard L. Polin, Bureau Chief, Douglas James Glaid, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Jonathan David Tanoos, Assistant Attorney General, and Jeffrey Robert Geldens, 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.