Narrative Opinion Summary
Walter James Griffin's appeal for a writ of mandamus was denied. The court reviewed Griffin's initial brief and determined that the arguments had already been addressed in a prior appeal (Griffin v. Dugger, 575 So.2d 657, Fla. 1st DCA 1991), where they were found to lack merit. Consequently, the trial court's order was affirmed in accordance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a). Judges JOANOS, WIGGINTON, and BARFIELD concurred with the decision.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation Under Appellate Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The trial court's order was affirmed pursuant to the procedural rule that allows for decisions based on established precedent.
Reasoning: Consequently, the trial court's order was affirmed in accordance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a).
Denial of Writ of Mandamussubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied Walter James Griffin's appeal for a writ of mandamus because the arguments had been previously addressed and found without merit.
Reasoning: Walter James Griffin's appeal for a writ of mandamus was denied.
Effect of Prior Adjudicationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed the trial court's order by relying on the findings from a prior appeal, indicating that the issues had already been resolved.
Reasoning: The court reviewed Griffin's initial brief and determined that the arguments had already been addressed in a prior appeal (Griffin v. Dugger, 575 So.2d 657, Fla. 1st DCA 1991), where they were found to lack merit.