Keith Bland v. State of Florida

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC95598 ____________ KEITH BLAND, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [June 22, 2000] PER CURIAM. We have for review the decision in Bland v. State, 729 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District certified the same question which it certified in Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999): DOES THE PRISON RELEASEE REOFFENDER PUNISHMENT ACT, CODIFIED AS SECTION 775.082(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION? We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We recently approved the First District's opinion in Woods, holding that the Prisoner Releasee Reoffender Act, as properly interpreted by the First District, does not violate separation of powers, and rejecting other constitutional challenges to the Act. See State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281 (Fla. June 15, 2000). Accordingly, for the reasons expressed in Cotton, we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the First District s decision in this case. It is so ordered. HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur. QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED. QUINCE, J., dissenting. I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281 (Fla. June 15, 2000). Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - Certified Great Public Importance First District - Case No. 1D98-965 (Duval County) Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and Sherrie Barnes, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, Florida, for Petitioner -2- Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, James W. Rogers, Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals, and Charmaine M. Millsaps, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Respondent -3-

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.