Whether the court can depart from clearly established law on case by case basis?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED | GROUND 1) Whether the court can depart from clearly established law on case by case basis? State v. Gray, 435 So. 2d 816, 818 (Fla. 1983) is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court which says indictment or information that wholly omits to allege one or more of the essential element of a crime” can not support a conviction of that c rim. It also says this is a defect that canbe raised at “anytime” before trial, after trial, on appeal, or by habeas corpus this Supreme Court case is in conflict with the trial court and DCA rulings. GROUND 2) Does the State of Florida practice of allowing a jury to be instructed that a criminal defendant may be found guilty as a principal where that defendant has not been charged pursuant to Florida _—Stat. 777.011 violates the U.S. Const. Amend. Which requires that a criminal defendant be informed of the charges against him? GROUND 3) Can counsel waive defendant constitutional rights 6" Amendment to be informed of the nature of cause of the accusation against him where defendant never knowing, voluntarily, and __ intelligently waive his right? | GROUND 4) Can the trial court instruct the jury on two combined primary | offenses? 1) Robbery with a deadly weapon or 2) robbery with a firearm, where robbery with a deadly weapon is not a lesserincluded offense of robbery with a firearm. See Davis v. State, 235 | So. 3d 320. | | | | | | | | | | | | ll ,