32 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Jones v. Stategreen2 sentences2019Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it “weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.” Jones II, 709 So. 2d at 526 (quoting Jones v State, 678 So. 2d 309, 315 (Fla. 1996)). 2019Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it “weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.” Jones II, 709 So. 2d at 526 (quoting Jones v State, 678 So. 2d 309, 315 (Fla. 1996)). | 26 | 28 |
Jones v. Stategreen2 sentences2017In determining whether the newly discovered evidence compels a new trial, the trial court must “consider all newly discovered evidence which would be admissible,” and must “evaluate the weight of both the newly discovered evidence and the evidence which was introduced at the trial.” Jones v. State, 591 So. 2d 911, 916 (Fla. 1991) (“Jones I”). 2017In determining whether the newly discovered evidence compels a new trial, the trial court must “consider all newly discovered evidence which would be admissible,” and must “evaluate the weight of both the newly discovered evidence and the evidence which was introduced at the trial.” Jones v. State, 591 So. 2d 911, 916 (Fla. 1991) (“Jones I”). | 8 | 10 |
Marek v. Stategreen2 sentences2016Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it “weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.” Jones II, 709 So.2d at 526 (quoting Jones v. State, 678 So.2d 309, 315 (Fla.1996)). *791 Marek v. State, 14 So.3d 985, 990 (Fla.2009). 2016Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it “weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.” Jones II, 709 So.2d at 526 (quoting Jones v. State, 678 So.2d 309, 315 (Fla.1996)). *791 Marek v. State, 14 So.3d 985, 990 (Fla.2009). | 7 | 7 |
Jones v. Stategreen2 sentences2024“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’” Id. (quoting Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512, 526 (Fla. 1998) (“Jones II”)). 2024“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’” Id. (quoting Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512, 526 (Fla. 1998) (“Jones II”)). | 2 | 30 |
McLin v. Stategreen2 sentences2024In the context of a postconviction claim of newly discovered evidence, “Florida law treats recantations with suspicion.” McLin v. State, 827 So. 2d 948, 955 (Fla. 2002) (additional citation omitted). 2024In the context of a postconviction claim of newly discovered evidence, “Florida law treats recantations with suspicion.” McLin v. State, 827 So. 2d 948, 955 (Fla. 2002) (additional citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Lightbourne v. Stategreen2 sentences2014See, e.g., Lightbourne, 742 So. 2d at 247 ; Swafford, 125 So. 3d at 775-76 . 2014See, e.g., Lightbourne, 742 So. 2d at 247 ; Swafford, 125 So. 3d at 775-76 . | 1 | 1 |
Gore v. Stategreen2 sentences2013“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the ease against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’ ” Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769, 774 (Fla.) (quoting Jones II, 709 So.2d at 526 ), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1904 , 182 L.Ed.2d 661 (2012). “ ‘If the defendant is seeking to vacate a sentence, the second prong requires that the newly discovered evidence would probably yield a less se vere sentence.’ ” Id. at 774 (quoting Marek v. State, 14 So.3d 985, 990 (Fla.2009)). 2013“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the ease against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’ ” Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769, 774 (Fla.) (quoting Jones II, 709 So.2d at 526 ), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1904 , 182 L.Ed.2d 661 (2012). “ ‘If the defendant is seeking to vacate a sentence, the second prong requires that the newly discovered evidence would probably yield a less se vere sentence.’ ” Id. at 774 (quoting Marek v. State, 14 So.3d 985, 990 (Fla.2009)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. State
green
2 sentences2024“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’” Id. (quoting Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512, 526 (Fla. 1998) (“Jones II”)). 2024“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the case against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’” Id. (quoting Jones v. State, 709 So. 2d 512, 526 (Fla. 1998) (“Jones II”)). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Swafford v. State
green
2 sentences2014See, e.g., Lightbourne, 742 So. 2d at 247 ; Swafford, 125 So. 3d at 775-76 . 2014See, e.g., Lightbourne, 742 So. 2d at 247 ; Swafford, 125 So. 3d at 775-76 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
In re Gore
green
2 sentences2013“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the ease against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’ ” Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769, 774 (Fla.) (quoting Jones II, 709 So.2d at 526 ), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1904 , 182 L.Ed.2d 661 (2012). “ ‘If the defendant is seeking to vacate a sentence, the second prong requires that the newly discovered evidence would probably yield a less se vere sentence.’ ” Id. at 774 (quoting Marek v. State, 14 So.3d 985, 990 (Fla.2009)). 2013“Newly discovered evidence satisfies the second prong of the Jones II test if it ‘weakens the ease against [the defendant] so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his culpability.’ ” Gore v. State, 91 So.3d 769, 774 (Fla.) (quoting Jones II, 709 So.2d at 526 ), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1904 , 182 L.Ed.2d 661 (2012). “ ‘If the defendant is seeking to vacate a sentence, the second prong requires that the newly discovered evidence would probably yield a less se vere sentence.’ ” Id. at 774 (quoting Marek v. State, 14 So.3d 985, 990 (Fla.2009)). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Kearse v. State
green
2 sentences2011In our analysis, we noted that “the evidence did not exist at the time of the resentencing.” *100 Id. 2011In our analysis, we noted that “the evidence did not exist at the time of the resentencing.” *100 Id. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.