Labrador v. State (2007)
green
· 7 citation events
across 1 courts.
Showing the 4 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Guzman v. State (2016)
Labrador v. State, 13 So.3d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).
green
Harper v. State (2010)
The rule just stated is subject to the qualification that the amended charge cannot “broaden or substantially amend the original charges.” Labrador v. State, 13 So.3d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (internal quotations marks omitted) (quoting United States v. Italiano, 894 F.2d 1280, 1282 (11th Cir.1990)).
internal quotations marks omitted
green
State v. BONAWITZ (2008)
The trial court granted Bonawitz's motion to dismiss, reasoning that the 2007 information "changed the conduct charged." We disagree. "`A superseding indictment brought after the statute of limitations has expired is valid so long as the original indictment is still pending and was timely and the superseding indictment does not broaden or substantially amend the original charges.'" Labrador v. State, No. 3D05-994, ___ So.2d ___, ___, 2007 WL 2316801, at *2 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. …
quoting United States v. Italiano, 894 F.2d 1280, 1282 (11th Cir.1990)
green
Jordy Yanes-Martel v. State of Florida (2026)
See Labrador v. State, 13 So. 3d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“A superseding indictment brought after the statute of limitations has expired is valid so long as the original indictment is still pending and was timely and the superseding indictment does not broaden or substantially amend the original charges.” (quoting United States v. Italiano, 894 F.2d 1280, 1282 (11th Cir. 1990))); Rubin v. State, 390 So. 2d 322, 324 (Fla. 1980) (“A subsequently filed information, which …