Leander J. Shaw jr

The case involved a negligence lawsuit by the parents of a child killed by a vehicle while crossing a road at night in an area with an inoperative streetlight; the parents sued Florida Power & Light Company for allegedly failing to maintain the light. The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings for the utility company, and the district court affirmed. The Florida Supreme Court quashed the district court's decision and remanded for further proceedings, relying on its holding in the related Clay Electric case that a utility company can assume a specific duty to maintain streetlights with due care. The Court instructed that the complaint's allegations must be taken as true when reviewing a motion for judgment on the pleadings and applied a de novo standard of review.

torts & liability

The case involved negligence claims filed by the grandmother and estate of a 14-year-old boy struck and killed by a truck while walking to his school bus stop in darkness caused by an inoperative streetlight. Clay Electric Cooperative, which had contracted with the local electric authority to maintain the streetlights and been paid to do so, moved for and obtained summary judgment on the ground that it owed no legally recognized duty to the decedent. The district court reversed, holding that a duty existed for purposes of the motion, and the Florida Supreme Court reviewed the matter due to conflict with another appellate decision. The court determined that Clay Electric owed a duty of reasonable care in maintaining the lights because the contract created foreseeable risks of harm to third-party pedestrians if the lights were not properly maintained, precluding summary judgment on that element.

torts & liability

The case concerned Florida's Parental Notice of Abortion Act, which required a minor seeking an abortion to notify a parent or obtain a judicial bypass by showing maturity or that the procedure was in her best interests. Lower courts had blocked enforcement of the never-implemented statute on constitutional grounds. The Florida Supreme Court held the Act unconstitutional under the state constitution's privacy provision, following its precedent in In re T.W. The court reasoned that the Act significantly burdened minors' privacy rights and that the state had not demonstrated a compelling interest, given inconsistent treatment of minors' medical decisions in other statutes. The decision left parents and minors free to consult without state-mandated notice or bypass procedures.

abortion

The case concerned the constitutionality of section 903.0471, Florida Statutes (2000), which authorizes a trial court to revoke a defendant's pretrial bond upon finding probable cause that the defendant committed a new offense while on release. Thomas Parker was arrested on initial charges, posted bond, and was later arrested on new drug charges; the trial court revoked his bond in the first case based solely on the probable cause affidavit for the new arrest, over defense objections regarding lack of notice and due process. Parker challenged the statute as violating article I, section 14 of the Florida Constitution, which guarantees pretrial release on reasonable conditions unless detention is necessary to protect the community, ensure appearance at trial, or preserve judicial integrity. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the district court's ruling that the statute is constitutional, holding that it validly implements the constitutional provision by permitting revocation when a new arrest creates risk to those interests, without requiring additional evidentiary findings beyond probable cause.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involves George James Trepal's appeals from the denial of his postconviction motions under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and his petition for a writ of habeas corpus after his convictions for the first-degree murder of Peggy Carr and related charges of attempted murder and poisoning with thallium. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court's denial of relief on both motions and denied the habeas petition. The court reasoned that many claims were procedurally barred, that Trepal failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel under the Strickland standard or entitlement to relief based on newly discovered evidence or Brady violations, and that other asserted errors lacked merit or did not undermine confidence in the outcome of the trial.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involves Jimmie Lee Coney, who was convicted of first-degree murder and arson after setting his former prison cellmate on fire, leading to a death sentence based on multiple aggravating factors. After an evidentiary hearing on Coney's motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, the circuit court vacated the death sentence due to ineffective assistance of trial counsel in the penalty phase and ordered a new penalty proceeding before a jury. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed that decision, finding that counsel's failure to adequately investigate and present available mitigating evidence regarding Coney's background satisfied the Strickland standards for deficiency and prejudice, while rejecting Coney's remaining claims on cross-appeal and denying his separate habeas petition.

criminal lawprocedure