impermissible factors in Florida

23 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2021 1 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.

Followed or applied (21)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Kinchengreen fla · 1985 · cited in 3 Florida opinions naming this issue, 1996–2008 2 sentences 2008See State v. Kinchen, 490 So.2d 21 (Fla.1985). 2002State v. Kinchen, 490 So.2d 21, 22 (Fla.1985).	3	3
Fernandez v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2017 · cited in 2 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2018–2019 2 sentences 2019See Love, 235 So. 3d at 1040 ; see also Fernandez v. State, 212 So. 3d 494, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge when the trial court considered impermissible factors at sentencing); Gray v. State, 964 So. 2d 884, 885 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (same); Schwartzberg v. State, 215 So. 3d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge "to preclude any perception on [appellant's] part that the resentencing may not be conducted in a completely fair and impartial manner" (alteration in original) (quoting Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 58 2018See Fernandez, 212 So.3d at 497 ; Gray, 964 So.2d at 885 .	2	2
MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc.green fla · 1990 · cited in 3 Florida opinions naming this issue, 1995–1997 2 sentences 1997MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc., 565 So.2d 1332 (Fla.1990). 1995Mac-Kenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc., 565 So.2d 1332 (Fla.1990).	1	3
MIRUTIL v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2010 · cited in 2 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2019–2021 2 sentences 2021This relief is consistent with precedent. 1 See Baehren v. State, 234 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018); Guerra v. State, 212 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Seays v. State, 789 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Yisrael v. State, 65 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 588 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Gray v. 1 Wilson v. State, 845 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2003), cited by the dissent, does not limit the remedy of sentencing before a different judge to cases involving the presumption of vindictiveness. 2019See Love, 235 So. 3d at 1040 ; see also Fernandez v. State, 212 So. 3d 494, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge when the trial court considered impermissible factors at sentencing); Gray v. State, 964 So. 2d 884, 885 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (same); Schwartzberg v. State, 215 So. 3d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge "to preclude any perception on [appellant's] part that the resentencing may not be conducted in a completely fair and impartial manner" (alteration in original) (quoting Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 58	1	2
Yisrael v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2011 · cited in 2 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2021 2 sentences 2021This relief is consistent with precedent. 1 See Baehren v. State, 234 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018); Guerra v. State, 212 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Seays v. State, 789 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Yisrael v. State, 65 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 588 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Gray v. 1 Wilson v. State, 845 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2003), cited by the dissent, does not limit the remedy of sentencing before a different judge to cases involving the presumption of vindictiveness. 2016See Yisrael v. State, 65 So.3d 1177, 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), approved by Norvil v. State, 191 So.3d 406 (Fla.2016); MacIntosh v. State, 182 So.3d 888 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016); Mosley v. State,. — So.3d ——, 40 Fla. L.	1	2
Gray v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2007 · cited in 2 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2018–2019 2 sentences 2019See Love, 235 So. 3d at 1040 ; see also Fernandez v. State, 212 So. 3d 494, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge when the trial court considered impermissible factors at sentencing); Gray v. State, 964 So. 2d 884, 885 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (same); Schwartzberg v. State, 215 So. 3d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge "to preclude any perception on [appellant's] part that the resentencing may not be conducted in a completely fair and impartial manner" (alteration in original) (quoting Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 58 2018See Fernandez, 212 So.3d at 497 ; Gray, 964 So.2d at 885 .	1	2
Ross v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2016 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 1 sentence 2020“Florida law gives a sentencing judge unlimited discretion to sentence a defendant up to the maximum term set by the legislature for a particular crime.” Alfonso-Roche v. State, 199 So. 3d 941, 946 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (Gross, J., concurring).	1	1
Love v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2018 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019See Love, 235 So. 3d at 1040 ; see also Fernandez v. State, 212 So. 3d 494, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge when the trial court considered impermissible factors at sentencing); Gray v. State, 964 So. 2d 884, 885 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (same); Schwartzberg v. State, 215 So. 3d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge "to preclude any perception on [appellant's] part that the resentencing may not be conducted in a completely fair and impartial manner" (alteration in original) (quoting Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 58	1	1
Schwartzberg v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2017 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019See Love, 235 So. 3d at 1040 ; see also Fernandez v. State, 212 So. 3d 494, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge when the trial court considered impermissible factors at sentencing); Gray v. State, 964 So. 2d 884, 885 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (same); Schwartzberg v. State, 215 So. 3d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (remanding for resentencing before a different judge "to preclude any perception on [appellant's] part that the resentencing may not be conducted in a completely fair and impartial manner" (alteration in original) (quoting Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 58	1	1
Bracero v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2009 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016Impermissible factors that the trial court may not consider during sentencing include “a defendant’s assertions of his innocence and refusal to admit guilt.” Hannum v. State, 13 So.3d 132, 135 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (citing Bracero v. State, 10 So.3d 664, 665-66 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Ritter v. State, 885 So.2d 413, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)). “[D]ue process guarantees an individual the right to maintain innocence even when faced with evidence of overwhelming guilt.” Holt v. State, 573 So.2d 284, 292 (Fla. 1990).	1	1
Boyd v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2009 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016Impermissible factors that the trial court may not consider during sentencing include “a defendant’s assertions of his innocence and refusal to admit guilt.” Hannum v. State, 13 So.3d 132, 135 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (citing Bracero v. State, 10 So.3d 664, 665-66 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Ritter v. State, 885 So.2d 413, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)). “[D]ue process guarantees an individual the right to maintain innocence even when faced with evidence of overwhelming guilt.” Holt v. State, 573 So.2d 284, 292 (Fla. 1990).	1	1
Sidney Norvil, Jr. v. State of Floridagreen fla · 2016 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016See Yisrael v. State, 65 So.3d 1177, 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), approved by Norvil v. State, 191 So.3d 406 (Fla.2016); MacIntosh v. State, 182 So.3d 888 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016); Mosley v. State,. — So.3d ——, 40 Fla. L.	1	1
Ritter v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016Impermissible factors that the trial court may not consider during sentencing include “a defendant’s assertions of his innocence and refusal to admit guilt.” Hannum v. State, 13 So.3d 132, 135 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (citing Bracero v. State, 10 So.3d 664, 665-66 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Ritter v. State, 885 So.2d 413, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)). “[D]ue process guarantees an individual the right to maintain innocence even when faced with evidence of overwhelming guilt.” Holt v. State, 573 So.2d 284, 292 (Fla. 1990).	1	1
Stone v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2013 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016When the defendant denies committing the crime, “[i]t is also generally improper for the sentencing court to consider the defendant’s lack of remorse.” Robinson v. State, 108 So.3d 1150, 1151 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (citations omitted). *278 We are aware that the trial court stated that the basis for the staffer sentence was Appellant’s danger to society and Appellant’s attempt to fabricate an alibi.	1	1
Holton v. Stategreen fla · 1991 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016Impermissible factors that the trial court may not consider during sentencing include “a defendant’s assertions of his innocence and refusal to admit guilt.” Hannum v. State, 13 So.3d 132, 135 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (citing Bracero v. State, 10 So.3d 664, 665-66 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Ritter v. State, 885 So.2d 413, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)). “[D]ue process guarantees an individual the right to maintain innocence even when faced with evidence of overwhelming guilt.” Holt v. State, 573 So.2d 284, 292 (Fla. 1990).	1	1
Reese v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 1994 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 1 sentence 2010Impermissible factors include a “belief that the defendant likely had committed previous acts of violence although [he] had never been charged with committing any such acts,” Epprecht v. State, 488 So.2d 129, 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); a “belief that the defendant was guilty of an offense of which he had been acquitted,” id.; and “unsubstantiated allegations of misconduct” and “unsupported speculations.” Reese v. State, 639 So.2d 1067, 1068 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).	1	1
Epprecht v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 1986 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 1 sentence 2010Impermissible factors include a “belief that the defendant likely had committed previous acts of violence although [he] had never been charged with committing any such acts,” Epprecht v. State, 488 So.2d 129, 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); a “belief that the defendant was guilty of an offense of which he had been acquitted,” id.; and “unsubstantiated allegations of misconduct” and “unsupported speculations.” Reese v. State, 639 So.2d 1067, 1068 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).	1	1
LeGrande v. Emmanuelgreen fladistctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008See, e.g., LeGrande v. Emmanuel, 889 So.2d 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (denying parishioners' motion to dismiss a minister's slander claims without prejudice to assert the claims in a summary judgment proceeding if warranted by the evidence).	1	1
Champion v. Graygreen fla · 1985 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996 1 sentence 1996See Champion v. Gray, 478 So.2d 17 (Fla.1985), receded from on other grounds, Zell v. Meek, 665 So.2d 1048 (Fla.1995).	1	1
Zell v. Meekgreen fla · 1995 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996 1 sentence 1996See Champion v. Gray, 478 So.2d 17 (Fla.1985), receded from on other grounds, Zell v. Meek, 665 So.2d 1048 (Fla.1995).	1	1
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commissiongreen scotus · 1980 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (17)

Case	Cited	Years
Seays v. State green fladistctapp · 2001 1 sentence 2021This relief is consistent with precedent. 1 See Baehren v. State, 234 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018); Guerra v. State, 212 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Seays v. State, 789 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Yisrael v. State, 65 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 588 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Gray v. 1 Wilson v. State, 845 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2003), cited by the dissent, does not limit the remedy of sentencing before a different judge to cases involving the presumption of vindictiveness.	1	2021–2021
Wilson v. State green fla · 2003 1 sentence 2021This relief is consistent with precedent. 1 See Baehren v. State, 234 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018); Guerra v. State, 212 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Seays v. State, 789 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Yisrael v. State, 65 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 588 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Gray v. 1 Wilson v. State, 845 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2003), cited by the dissent, does not limit the remedy of sentencing before a different judge to cases involving the presumption of vindictiveness.	1	2021–2021
Guerra v. State green fladistctapp · 2017 1 sentence 2021This relief is consistent with precedent. 1 See Baehren v. State, 234 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018); Guerra v. State, 212 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Seays v. State, 789 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Yisrael v. State, 65 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Mirutil v. State, 30 So. 3d 588 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Gray v. 1 Wilson v. State, 845 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 2003), cited by the dissent, does not limit the remedy of sentencing before a different judge to cases involving the presumption of vindictiveness.	1	2021–2021
MacIntosh v. State green fladistctapp · 2016 1 sentence 2016See Yisrael v. State, 65 So.3d 1177, 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), approved by Norvil v. State, 191 So.3d 406 (Fla.2016); MacIntosh v. State, 182 So.3d 888 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016); Mosley v. State,. — So.3d ——, 40 Fla. L.	1	2016–2016
Varona v. State green fladistctapp · 1996 2 sentences 2014On appeal, the Fourth District found that the prosecutor’s comments were improper because “they tended to demean a constitutional right and called undue attention to appellant’s decision whether or not to testify,” explaining that “[a]ny remark which is ‘fairly susceptible’ of being interpreted as a comment on a defendant’s failure to testify is an impermissible violation of the constitutional right to remain silent.” Id. at 825 . 2014In evaluating whether the error was harmless, the district court determined that the evidence was “strong, but not ‘clearly conclusive.’ ” Id. (quoting DiGuilio, 491 So.2d at 1138 ).	1	2014–2014
State v. DiGuilio green fla · 1986 1 sentence 2014In evaluating whether the error was harmless, the district court determined that the evidence was “strong, but not ‘clearly conclusive.’ ” Id. (quoting DiGuilio, 491 So.2d at 1138 ).	1	2014–2014
Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc. v. Seeger green fladistctapp · 2007 1 sentence 2008Lawnwood, 959 So.2d at 1224 .	1	2008–2008
Green v. State green fladistctapp · 2003 1 sentence 2003I agree with the rationale of the court in Green v. State, 839 So.2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), which held that retroactive application of the reenactment legislation, specifically chapter 212, Laws of Florida, constitutes an impermissible violation of the Ex Post Facto Clauses of the federal and Florida constitutions.	1	2003–2003
Mark Drevlow v. Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod green ca8 · 1993 1 sentence 2000The court indicated that, because it was reviewing an order on a motion to dismiss, it was unclear whether “the evidence offered at trial will definitely involve the district court in an impermissible inquiry into the Synod’s bylaws or religious beliefs.” Id.	1	2000–2000
Management Corp. of America, Inc. v. Grossman green fladistctapp · 1981 1 sentence 1995See MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc., 565 So.2d 1332 (Fla.1990); Hill v. Feder, 564 So.2d 609 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Management Corp. of Am. v. Grossman, Inc., 396 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).	1	1995–1995
Hill v. Feder green fladistctapp · 1990	1	1995–1995
Oats v. State green fla · 1984	1	1991–1991
Preston v. State green fla · 1990	1	1991–1991
Marks v. State Road Department green fla · 1954	1	1985–1985
Fitzell v. Rama Industries, Inc. green fladistctapp · 1982	1	1985–1985
Raidle Cook Insurance, Inc. v. American States Insurance Co. neutral fladistctapp · 1983	1	1985–1985
Elledge v. State green fla · 1977	1	1980–1980

Where else courts name it

CA 145 (1965–2026) NY 55 (1964–2026) TX 34 (1973–2024) PA 27 (1978–2025) FL 23 (1980–2021) MI 18 (1984–2023) IL 14 (1962–2015) WA 13 (1978–2022) WV 12 (1978–2026) NV 11 (1985–2021) CO 10 (1966–2016) DC 9 (1982–2022) NC 9 (1989–2022) MA 8 (1979–2011) OR 8 (1986–2025) IA 8 (2014–2023) MO 7 (1980–2023) OH 7 (1999–2023) AZ 6 (1987–2017) CT 6 (1985–2025) MN 6 (1968–2025) NJ 6 (1981–2021) WI 6 (1987–2017) GA 5 (1989–2026) AL 5 (1983–2016) IN 5 (1991–2020) OK 4 (1980–2006) ND 4 (1984–2023) LA 4 (1983–2022) MD 3 (1974–2001) RI 3 (1981–2026) ME 3 (2002–2015) VT 2 (1984–2010) UT 2 (1988–2022) NM 2 (2010–2022) SC 2 (1994–1996) MT 2 (2007–2010)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check