Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
32 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2019 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Novaton v. Stategreen2 sentences2019However, the Florida Supreme Court explained that there is an exception to the general rule when a defendant can demonstrate: "(a) the plea is a general plea as -3- distinguished from a plea bargain; (b) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the record; and (c) there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation." Id. (quoting Novaton v. State, 634 So. 2d 607, 609 (Fla. 1994)). 2017An exception to this general rule is “when (a) the plea is a general plea as distinguished from a plea bargain; (b) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the record; and (c) there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation.” Novaton, 634 So.2d at 609 . | 18 | 24 |
Melvin v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla. 1994); see also Melvin v. State, 645 So.2d 448 , 449 n. 1 (Fla.1994) (explaining the difference between a "plea agreement" and a "plea bargain"; in a "plea bargain" the defendant negotiates with the State and agrees to plead in exchange for some benefit, such as a reduced sentence). 2002Id. at 609 . | 2 | 4 |
Bailey v. Stategreen1 sentence2019“Although a guilty plea and adjudication of guilt generally preclude a later double jeopardy attack, an exception applies when, as in this case, there is a general or open plea, the double jeopardy is apparent from the face of the record, and there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of double jeopardy.” Bailey v. State, 21 So. 3d 147, 149 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009). | 1 | 1 |
Bell v. Stategreen1 sentence2019“For double jeopardy purposes lesser included offenses are tantamount to the greater offense charged if all the constituent essential elements of such lesser offenses are included within the elements of such greater offense.” Bell v. State, 437 So. 2d 1057, 1058 (Fla. 1983). | 1 | 1 |
Godfrey v. Stategreen1 sentence2017In the instant case, the parties agree that the defendant has met the first prong because his plea was an “open plea” to the court, not a bargained-for plea, see God-frey v. State, 947 So.2d 565, 567 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (holding that an “open plea” does not amount to a bargained-for plea), and the third prong because the defendant did not specifically waive his right to appeal a double jeopardy violation despite waiving his right to appeal any of the trial court’s rulings. | 1 | 1 |
Meythaler v. Stategreen1 sentence2016See Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d. 607, 609 (Fla.1994) (noting that a defendant that entered a plea may still raise a double jeopardy claim:.on appeal when “(a) the plea is a general plea as distinguished from a,plea bargain; (b) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the record; and (e) there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation”); Meythaler v. State, 175 So.3d 918, 919 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (same). | 1 | 1 |
Grene v. Stategreen1 sentence2015In other words, “if [the] defendant enters into a general plea of guilty or no contest to the criminal charges, but leaves sentencing up to the court, then there is no waiver of the double jeopardy violation.” Grene v. State, 702 So.2d 510, 511 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). | 1 | 1 |
Demps v. Stategreen1 sentence2009Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla.1994); Demps v. State, 965 So.2d 1242, 1243 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See Brown v. State, 1 So.3d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), citing Novaton, v. State, 634 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla. 1994). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Broce
green
2 sentences2019However, the Florida Supreme Court explained that there is an exception to the general rule when a defendant can demonstrate: "(a) the plea is a general plea as -3- distinguished from a plea bargain; (b) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the record; and (c) there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation." Id. (quoting Novaton v. State, 634 So. 2d 607, 609 (Fla. 1994)). 2015However, “[t]here is an exception to this general rule when (a) the plea is a general plea as distinguished from a plea bargain; (b) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the record; and (c) there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation.” Id. | 4 | 1997–2019 |
Long v. State
green
1 sentence2014“There is an exception to this general rule when (a) the plea is a general plea as distinguished from a plea bargain; (b) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the record; and (c) there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation.” Long, 678 So.2d at 927 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Wright v. State
green
1 sentence1997Other cases from this district following the same rule are found in footnote 4. [2] According to the Novaton court, this analysis applies "when (a) the plea is a general plea as distinguished from a plea bargain; (b) the double jeopardy violation is apparent from the record; and (c) there is nothing in the record to indicate a waiver of the double jeopardy violation." Id. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Harris v. State
green
1 sentence1996Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d 607 (Fla.1994); Melvin v. State, 645 So.2d 448 (Fla.1994); Harris v. State, 641 So.2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Cochenet v. State
green
1 sentence1992We find Cochenet v. State, 445 So.2d 398 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 453 So.2d 45 (Fla. 1984), analogous. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.