STATE v. BELL, SC07-451 (Fla. 11-8-2007)

STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, v. JEROME T. BELL, Respondent.

No. SC07-451.Supreme Court of Florida.
November 8, 2007.

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Direct Conflict, Second District — Case No. 2D04-1313, Polk County.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, Robert J. Krauss, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and Chandra Waite Dasrat, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, for Petitioner.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Allyn M. Giambalvo, Assistant Public Defender, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Bartow, Florida, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Bell v. State, 32 Fla. L. Weekly D476 (Fla. 2d DCA Feb. 16, 2007), in which the Second District Court of Appeal acknowledged (but did not certify) conflict with Reeves v. State, 920 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), approved, 957 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 2007),cert. denied, No. 07-6283 (U.S. Nov. 5, 2007). At the time the Second District issued its decision in Bell, Reeves was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.;Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981).

We stayed proceedings in this case pending disposition ofReeves. After Reeves was decided, we issued an order directing respondent to show cause why

Page 2

we should not accept jurisdiction, quash the Bell decision, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Reeves. In his response, respondent concedes that “there is no reason for this Court not to take the actions contemplated in its order.”

We accordingly grant the petition for review in the present case, quash the decision under review, and remand this matter to the Second District Court of Appeal for reconsideration upon application of this Court’s decision in Reeves.

It is so ordered.

LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED.

Page 1