# Childers v. State

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · February 2, 2006 · 931 So. 2d 86

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7782957

## Case

- **Full name:** Wyon Dale CHILDERS, Appellant/Cross-Appellee v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Cross-Appellant
- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** February 2, 2006
- **Citations:** 931 So. 2d 86; 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17207; 2006 WL 237081
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Wolf
- **Judges:** Allen, Benton, Browning, Davis, Ervin, Hawkes, Kahn, Lewis, Nortwick, Padovano, Polston, Thomas, Webster, Wolf
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7782957

## Opinion text

WOLF, J.,
Concurring and Dissenting.
I concur with the decisions of the court to affirm the conviction and to uphold restitution in favor of the county. I dissent, however, from the decision to go en banc for substantially the same reasons expressed by Judge Kahn and Judge Ervin.
I also feel that I must address two matters raised by Judge Allen’s concurrence. I challenge the implication that the restitution issue had anything to do with the vote of the court to go en banc. I suggest, rather, that it is an attempted after-the- *116 fact justification for a decision which otherwise cannot be justified. 6
I am also concerned with the statement that “involvement of a particular party” might justify exercise of the court’s en banc jurisdiction. If this statement implies that the name of a particular person involved in the ease affects the quantum of consideration and scrutiny available in a particular ease, I strongly disagree. 7 A party is entitled to the same consideration from this court whether his name is Child-ers or Smith. To do otherwise would place more importance on personalities than equal application of the rule of law.
. While I agree with the result reached by the majority on the restitution issue, I question its overall importance in light of how rarely a local government is a victim and because this is an issue which can easily be remedied by the Legislature.
. If this statement is intended to convey the message that there may be an important issue affecting the duties of a person who holds a particular office and rising to the level of exceptional importance, I do not argue with this concept.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7782957. Public record. Not legal advice.