Richard Delisle, Petitioner v. Crane Co., Respondents. — Canady, J., Dissenting

Summary

The dissent argues that the Supreme Court of Florida lacks express-and-direct-conflict jurisdiction because the decision below applied a later statute that displaced prior Frye-based law, so the earlier decisions did not address the same question of law. It would discharge the case rather than reach the constitutionality of the statutory amendment, while observing that the constitutional issue could have been reviewed if properly presented below. Justice Pariente, concurring, additionally viewed the amendment as potentially impairing access to courts, and Justice Labarga, concurring, concluded that jurisdiction existed because the decision below conflicted with prior Frye decisions.