INNES v. STATE, 620 So.2d 1233 (Fla. 1993)

JOSEPH INNES, PETITIONER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT.

No. 79902.Supreme Court of Florida.
June 24, 1993.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Direct Conflict of Decisions, Second District — Case No. 91-02666, Pinellas County.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Allyn Giambalvo, Asst. Public Defender, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Clearwater, for petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Peggy A. Quince and Stephen A. Baker, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tampa, for respondent.

Page 1234

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Innes v. State, 597 So.2d 966 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), in which the district court asserted conflict with Lang v. State, 566 So.2d 1354 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

We addressed the issue in this case in Sirmons v. State, 620 So.2d 1249
(Fla. 1993). Accordingly, we quash the decision below and remand for proceedings consistent with Sirmons.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, McDONALD, SHAW, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.

BARKETT, C.J., concurs specially with an opinion.

BARKETT, Chief Justice, specially concurring.

I concur, but with the same reservations I expressed i Sirmons v. State, 620 So.2d 1249 (Fla. 1993).