Florida Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the Courts of Florida - unoffical reports - Opinions

ROMINGER LEGAL

Florida Case Law & Florida Court Opinions - Florida Law

Need Legal Help?

LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER

LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS

NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This court case was taken from the Florida Court's web site. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
JANUARY TERM 2005
BEVERLY ANN O'BRIEN,
Appellant,
v.
Case No. 5D03-3484
JAMES KEVIN O'BRIEN,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed April 29, 2005
Appeal from the Circuit Court
for Orange County,
Donald E. Grincewicz, Judge.
Ryan Thomas Truskoski of Ryan Thomas
Truskoski, P.A., Orlando, for Appellant.
David F. Allen, Winter Park, for Appellee.
SAWAYA, C.J.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
Beverly Ann O'Brien, the appellant, has filed a Motion For Rehearing with respect
to our opinion entered in this appeal on February 11, 2005. Although we deny the
motion in toto, we will address the assertion implicit in the motion that this court has
either directly, or by implication, convicted O'Brien of a crime.
In our opinion, we stated that "the trial court found that the electronic
communications were illegally intercepted in violation of the Act and ordered that they
not be admitted in evidence." It was upon this basis that the trial court excluded the

electronic communications that O'Brien attempted to introduce into evidence, and we
simply held that the trial court was within its broad grant of discretion in ruling that the
communications should be inadmissible for that reason. Because we were unable to
conclude that the trial court abused its discretion, we affirmed. This is certainly a far cry
from saying that O'Brien has, in fact, committed a crime and should be convicted.
Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a) allows a party to file a motion for
rehearing to bring to the court's attention a point of law or fact that the court has
overlooked or misapprehended. The purpose of the rule is not to raise issues based on
an extraordinarily strained and unreasonable interpretation of an opinion rendered by
this court. We also take this opportunity to note that the other allegations and
arguments raised in O'Brien's motion are without merit or are points of law or fact
already considered by this court.
MOTION FOR REHEARING DENIED.
SHARP, W. and MONACO, JJ., concur.
2

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Florida Case Law & Florida Court Opinions - Florida Law
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE