green
Positive treatment
15.2 score
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Damato - Kushel
Of course, because this legislative history addresses the language of the implementing legislation and not the language of the victim’s rights amendment itself, it bears only limited relevance to the meaning of the amendment. 13 Practice Book § 39-1 provides in relevant part: ‘‘The prosecuting author- ity and counsel for the defendant, or the defendant when not represented by counsel, may engage in discussions at any time with a view towards disposition. . . .’’ 14 Practice Book § 39-2 provides in relevant part: The prosecuting authority shall not engage in plea discussions at the …
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Damato - Kushel
Moreover, aside from Florida; see Ault v. State , 53 So.3d 175 , 201 (Fla. 2010) ("a criminal defendant has the right to be present at any pretrial conference, unless waived by defendant in writing" [internal quotation marks omitted] ), cert. denied, 565 U.S. 871 , 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed. 2d 124 (2011) ; the plaintiff in error has identified no jurisdiction, and we have found none, in which a defendant has the right-by statute, court rule, or constitutional provision-to be personally present during plea negotiations.
cited
Cited "see"
Joseph Edward Jordan v. State of Florida
See Ault v. State, 53 So.3d 175, 186 (Fla.2010), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed.2d 124 (2011).
cited
Cited "see"
Allen v. State
See Ault v. State, 53 So.3d 175, 186 (Fla.2010), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed.2d 124 (2011).
discussed
Cited "see"
Patrick v. State
See Ault v. State, 53 So.3d 175, 198-200 (Fla.2010) (concluding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting four relevant autopsy photographs that were not unduly prejudicial during Ault’s new penalty phase trial on resentencing), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed.2d 124 (2011); see also Rose, 787 So.2d 786, 794-95 (Fla.2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
Martin v. State
See Ault v. State, 53 So.3d 175, 189 (Fla.2010) (“A trial court may properly reject a proposed mitigating circumstance where there is competent, substantial evidence in the record to support its rejection.”), cert. denied, - U.S -, 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed.2d 124 (2011).
cited
Cited "see"
Oyola v. State
See Ault v. State, 53 So.3d 175, 186 (Fla.2010), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed.2d 124 (2011).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hampton v. State
See Ault v. State, 53 So.3d 175, 199 (Fla.2010) (“[A] trial court’s decision to admit photographic evidence will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed.2d 124 (2011); Harris, 843 So.2d at 864 (“The admission of such photographs is within the trial court’s discretion and will only be reversed when an abuse of discretion has been demonstrated.”); Rose v. State, 787 So.2d 786, 794 (Fla.2001) (“Absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion by the trial court, a ruling on admissibility of such evidence [gruesome photograph…
discussed
Cited "see"
Snelgrove v. State
See Ault v. State, 53 So.3d 175, 189 (Fla.2010) (“Ault’s admission that he planned the abduction and assault of the victims in advance ... negates a finding that he was under an extreme mental or emotional disturbance at the time of the offense.”), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 224 , 181 L.Ed.2d 124 (2011); Hoskins v. State, 965 So.2d 1, 17 (Fla.2007) (“The defense’s own expert testified that Hoskins’s actions required planning.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jose Nacacio Amu
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 10-11167.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 3, 2011.
181 L. Ed. 2d 124
Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Same case below, 406 Fed. Appx. 770.