view rule in Florida

2018See, e.g., Burns, 170 So. 3d at 94 n.3 (“The record in the present case reflects nothing more than what the cases term unknowing acquiescence.”) (citing numerous cases); Williams v. State, 145 So. 3d 997, 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (“Nothing supports the view that defense counsel affirmatively agreed to the omission, knowing that the instructions were incomplete.”).

2018See, e.g., Burns, 170 So. 3d at 94 n.3 (“The record in the present case reflects nothing more than what the cases term unknowing acquiescence.”) (citing numerous cases); Williams v. State, 145 So. 3d 997, 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (“Nothing supports the view that defense counsel affirmatively agreed to the omission, knowing that the instructions were incomplete.”).

2014See, e.g., Daniels v. State, 72 So.3d 227, 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 121 *1004 So.3d 409 (Fla.2013) (concluding defense counsel’s acquiescence, silence, or argument in favor of the standard instruction on manslaughter did not constitute waiver or invited error); Paul v. State, 63 So.3d 828, 829 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 137 So.3d 1021 (Fla.2014) (concluding defense counsel’s statements and failure to object did not waive fundamental error in jury instructions); Beckham v. State, 884 So.2d 969, 973 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (rejecting argument that claim o

2014See, e.g., Daniels v. State, 72 So.3d 227, 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 121 *1004 So.3d 409 (Fla.2013) (concluding defense counsel’s acquiescence, silence, or argument in favor of the standard instruction on manslaughter did not constitute waiver or invited error); Paul v. State, 63 So.3d 828, 829 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 137 So.3d 1021 (Fla.2014) (concluding defense counsel’s statements and failure to object did not waive fundamental error in jury instructions); Beckham v. State, 884 So.2d 969, 973 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (rejecting argument that claim o

2014See, e.g., Daniels v. State, 72 So.3d 227, 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 121 *1004 So.3d 409 (Fla.2013) (concluding defense counsel’s acquiescence, silence, or argument in favor of the standard instruction on manslaughter did not constitute waiver or invited error); Paul v. State, 63 So.3d 828, 829 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 137 So.3d 1021 (Fla.2014) (concluding defense counsel’s statements and failure to object did not waive fundamental error in jury instructions); Beckham v. State, 884 So.2d 969, 973 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (rejecting argument that claim o

2014See, e.g., Daniels v. State, 72 So.3d 227, 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 121 *1004 So.3d 409 (Fla.2013) (concluding defense counsel’s acquiescence, silence, or argument in favor of the standard instruction on manslaughter did not constitute waiver or invited error); Paul v. State, 63 So.3d 828, 829 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 137 So.3d 1021 (Fla.2014) (concluding defense counsel’s statements and failure to object did not waive fundamental error in jury instructions); Beckham v. State, 884 So.2d 969, 973 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (rejecting argument that claim o

2014See, e.g., Daniels v. State, 72 So.3d 227, 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 121 *1004 So.3d 409 (Fla.2013) (concluding defense counsel’s acquiescence, silence, or argument in favor of the standard instruction on manslaughter did not constitute waiver or invited error); Paul v. State, 63 So.3d 828, 829 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011), quashed on other grounds, 137 So.3d 1021 (Fla.2014) (concluding defense counsel’s statements and failure to object did not waive fundamental error in jury instructions); Beckham v. State, 884 So.2d 969, 973 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (rejecting argument that claim o

2013First, it noted that McCoy failed to rely upon any legal authority prohibiting the use of the phrase “God given common sense.” Second, the postconviction court found that the phrase was not objectionable and, in fact, noted “in the Jacksonville community, any objection by defense counsel to the State’s mention of ‘God given common sense,’ could have adversely affected the panel’s view of the defense.” To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim for failure to object to statements by the prosecution, a defendant “must first show that the comments were improper or objectionable and

2012Malicki, 814 So.2d at 358 ; see, e.g., Gibson v. Brewer, 952 S.W.2d 239, 246 (Mo.1997).

2010Appellant compounded its error by including in its motion new arguments related to an issue already addressed in its briefs and at oral argument. "[L]egal arguments... must be made between the parties before a judicial decision is rendered; not between one litigant and a tribunal which has already ruled." Dep't of Revenue v. Leadership Housing, Inc., 322 So.2d 7, 9 (Fla.1975); see also Cartee v. Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehab.

2010Appellant compounded its error by including in its motion new arguments related to an issue already addressed in its briefs and at oral argument. “[L]egal arguments ... must be made between the parties before a judicial decision is rendered; not between one litigant and a tribunal which has already ruled.” Dep’t of Revenue v. Leadership Housing, Inc., 322 So.2d 7, 9 (Fla.1975); see also Cartee v. Fla. Dep’t of Health & Rehab.

2010Jaytex Realty Co. v. Green, 105 So.2d 817, 818-19 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958); see also Ayala v. Gonzalez, 984 So.2d 523, 526 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (reiterating the court's view that the privilege to seek a rehearing is not "an open invitation for an unhappy litigant or attorney to reargue the same points previously presented, or to discuss the bottomless depth of the displeasure that one might feel ... as a result of having unsuccessfully sought appellate relief.").

2010Jaytex Realty Co. v. Green, 105 So.2d 817, 818-19 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958); see also Ayala v. Gonzalez, 984 So.2d 523, 526 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (reiterating the court’s view that the privilege to seek a rehearing is not “an open invitation for an unhappy litigant or attorney to reargue the same points previously presented, or to discuss the bottomless depth of the displeasure that one might feel ... as a result of having unsuccessfully sought appellate relief.”).

2010Jaytex Realty Co. v. Green, 105 So.2d 817, 818-19 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958); see also Ayala v. Gonzalez, 984 So.2d 523, 526 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (reiterating the court's view that the privilege to seek a rehearing is not "an open invitation for an unhappy litigant or attorney to reargue the same points previously presented, or to discuss the bottomless depth of the displeasure that one might feel ... as a result of having unsuccessfully sought appellate relief.").

2010Jaytex Realty Co. v. Green, 105 So.2d 817, 818-19 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958); see also Ayala v. Gonzalez, 984 So.2d 523, 526 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (reiterating the court’s view that the privilege to seek a rehearing is not “an open invitation for an unhappy litigant or attorney to reargue the same points previously presented, or to discuss the bottomless depth of the displeasure that one might feel ... as a result of having unsuccessfully sought appellate relief.”).

2009See Roberts v. State, 894 N.E.2d 1018 (Ind.App.2008) (holding that “a party, who has rendered a witness unavailable for cross-examination through a criminal act, including homicide, may not object to the introduction of hearsay statements by the witness as being inadmissible”); State v. Mason, 160 Wash.2d 910 , 162 P.3d 396 (2007) (holding that equity compelled the adoption of the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing when the defendant was unable to confront a witness who was unavailable due to defendant’s own action); State v. Jensen, 299 Wis.2d 267 , 727 N.W.2d 518 (2007); People v. Bauder,

2006See, e.g., Braxton v. Morris, 914 So.2d 8 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Lyn v. Lyn, 884 So.2d 181 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).

2001Justice Wells wrote a concurring opinion in which he expressed the view that the doctrine of sovereign immunity is not implicated when a court assesses against a governmental entity damages flowing from a wrongful injunction because "a governmental body waives sovereign immunity when it takes the affirmative action of invoking a court's equitable jurisdiction." Provident I, 718 So.2d at 741 (Wells, J., concurring).

1993See Blue v. Malone & Hyde, 575 So.2d 292, 293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) ("[T]he rule (4.110) contemplates record and nonrecord activity as sufficient ...