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.
18 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2025 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Valeragreen1 sentence2014See Claycomb v. State, 142 So.3d 916, 917 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (citing State v. Valera, 75 So.3d 330, 331-32 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)). | 1 | 1 |
Larry Claycomb v. State of Floridagreen1 sentence2014See Claycomb v. State, 142 So.3d 916, 917 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (citing State v. Valera, 75 So.3d 330, 331-32 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)). | 1 | 1 |
Jones v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Reyna v. State, 866 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Brazill v. State, 845 So.2d 282, 287-89 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Grier v. State, 605 So.2d 503, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Jones v. State, 443 So.2d 434, 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). | 1 | 1 |
Grier v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Reyna v. State, 866 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Brazill v. State, 845 So.2d 282, 287-89 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Grier v. State, 605 So.2d 503, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Jones v. State, 443 So.2d 434, 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). | 1 | 1 |
Reyna v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Reyna v. State, 866 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Brazill v. State, 845 So.2d 282, 287-89 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Grier v. State, 605 So.2d 503, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Jones v. State, 443 So.2d 434, 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). | 1 | 1 |
Brazill v. Stategreen1 sentence2013Reyna v. State, 866 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Brazill v. State, 845 So.2d 282, 287-89 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Grier v. State, 605 So.2d 503, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Jones v. State, 443 So.2d 434, 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Woodardgreen1 sentence2013E.g., State v. Woodard, 866 So.2d 120, 121 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See McLin, 827 So.2d at 955 (requiring an evidentiary hearing to determine the truthfulness of a recantation supporting a Rule 3.850 motion); Foster, 810 So.2d at 914 (finding that the trial court may only summarily deny claims raised in a Rule 3.850 where the claims are either facially invalid or conclusive refuted by the record); see also Whitsett v. State, 993 So.2d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (confirming that in a case where the victim has recanted accusations regarding commission of a crime, a defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea on the basis of such newly discovered evidence mu | 1 | 1 |
Foster v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See McLin, 827 So.2d at 955 (requiring an evidentiary hearing to determine the truthfulness of a recantation supporting a Rule 3.850 motion); Foster, 810 So.2d at 914 (finding that the trial court may only summarily deny claims raised in a Rule 3.850 where the claims are either facially invalid or conclusive refuted by the record); see also Whitsett v. State, 993 So.2d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (confirming that in a case where the victim has recanted accusations regarding commission of a crime, a defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea on the basis of such newly discovered evidence mu | 1 | 1 |
McLin v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See McLin, 827 So.2d at 955 (requiring an evidentiary hearing to determine the truthfulness of a recantation supporting a Rule 3.850 motion); Foster, 810 So.2d at 914 (finding that the trial court may only summarily deny claims raised in a Rule 3.850 where the claims are either facially invalid or conclusive refuted by the record); see also Whitsett v. State, 993 So.2d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (confirming that in a case where the victim has recanted accusations regarding commission of a crime, a defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea on the basis of such newly discovered evidence mu | 1 | 1 |
Scott v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See McLin, 827 So.2d at 955 (requiring an evidentiary hearing to determine the truthfulness of a recantation supporting a Rule 3.850 motion); Foster, 810 So.2d at 914 (finding that the trial court may only summarily deny claims raised in a Rule 3.850 where the claims are either facially invalid or conclusive refuted by the record); see also Whitsett v. State, 993 So.2d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (confirming that in a case where the victim has recanted accusations regarding commission of a crime, a defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea on the basis of such newly discovered evidence mu | 1 | 1 |
Whitsett v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See McLin, 827 So.2d at 955 (requiring an evidentiary hearing to determine the truthfulness of a recantation supporting a Rule 3.850 motion); Foster, 810 So.2d at 914 (finding that the trial court may only summarily deny claims raised in a Rule 3.850 where the claims are either facially invalid or conclusive refuted by the record); see also Whitsett v. State, 993 So.2d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (confirming that in a case where the victim has recanted accusations regarding commission of a crime, a defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea on the basis of such newly discovered evidence mu | 1 | 1 |
State v. Rodriguezgreen1 sentence2004See State v. Rodriguez, 575 So.2d 1262 (Fla.1991). | 1 | 1 |
Cohen v. Stategreen1 sentence2000“When the State discloses evidence to the defendant after a trial has started, the focus of inquiry is on procedural prejudice.” Cohen v. State, 581 So.2d 926, 928 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)(citing Thompson v. State, 565 So.2d 1311 (Fla.1990)). | 1 | 1 |
Amoss v. Stategreen1 sentence1998See Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 148 , 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978); see also Amoss v. State, 547 So.2d 716, 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). | 1 | 1 |
Mangoni v. Temkingreen1 sentence1998See Mangoni v. Temkin, 679 So.2d 1286, 1288 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)(the same negligent act may serve as the basis of both a negligence claim and a fraud or misrepresentation claim). | 1 | 1 |
Rakas v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences1998See Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 148 , 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978); see also Amoss v. State, 547 So.2d 716, 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). 1998See Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 148 , 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978); see also Amoss v. State, 547 So.2d 716, 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). | 1 | 1 |
National Enterprises, Inc. v. Martingreen1 sentence1997See National Enterprises, Inc. v. Martin, 679 So.2d 331 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). | 1 | 1 |
| Cowheard v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Everett v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Flores v. State
green
2 sentences2012The circuit court, relying on the Fourth District’s decision in Flores v. State, 57 So.3d 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), summarily denied Hernandez’s motion on the basis that the immigration consequences warning included in the plea colloquy pursuant to rule 3.172(c)(8) 3 precluded Hernandez from establishing the requisite prejudice under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). 4 .See id. 2011A. Flores v. State Flores distinguishes Padilla on a critical point: “Padilla was not advised by the trial court during the plea colloquy that the plea might result in deportation.” Flores, 57 So.3d at 220 . | 2 | 2011–2012 |
Voss v. Household Realty Corp.
neutral
1 sentence2025Any claim of error regarding this factual determination could have and should have been raised on direct appeal. 2 This court affirmed Hernandez’s judgment on February 19, 1997, see Hernandez v. State, 687 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) and the mandate issued March 7, 1997. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Green
green
1 sentence2013Id. at ---, S731. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Cain
green
1 sentence2013Although the direct file statute has been amended over the years, State v. Cain, 381 So.2d 1361 (Fla.1980), remains dispositive and mandates rejection of Hernandez’s claim, as he had no absolute right to be processed and charged as a juvenile. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences2012The circuit court, relying on the Fourth District’s decision in Flores v. State, 57 So.3d 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), summarily denied Hernandez’s motion on the basis that the immigration consequences warning included in the plea colloquy pursuant to rule 3.172(c)(8) 3 precluded Hernandez from establishing the requisite prejudice under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). 4 .See id. 2012The circuit court, relying on the Fourth District’s decision in Flores v. State, 57 So.3d 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), summarily denied Hernandez’s motion on the basis that the immigration consequences warning included in the plea colloquy pursuant to rule 3.172(c)(8) 3 precluded Hernandez from establishing the requisite prejudice under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). 4 .See id. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Stanek-Cousins v. State
neutral
1 sentence2009Because we note that our holding conflicts with Cole v. State, 280 So.2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), and Stanek-Cousins v. State, 896 So.2d 865 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), we certify the conflict for resolution by the Florida Supreme Court. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Cole v. State
neutral
1 sentence2009Because we note that our holding conflicts with Cole v. State, 280 So.2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), and Stanek-Cousins v. State, 896 So.2d 865 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), we certify the conflict for resolution by the Florida Supreme Court. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
DeGregorio v. Balkwill
green
1 sentence2005In DeGregorio v. Balkwill, 853 So.2d 371 (Fla.2003), the supreme court addressed conflicting case law on whether the 45-day time period was mandatory. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Hernandez v. Amisub, Inc.
green
1 sentence2003The Third District defined "conceal" as "to hide or withdraw from observation; to withhold knowledge of." Although this definition requires that the person concealing the information know about the information withheld, the Third District stated that "there was no need for Hernandez to prove that the Hospital or its employees had actual knowledge that a pad had been left inside Hernandez's abdomen, in order for Hernandez's claim to succeed." Hernandez, 714 So.2d at 541 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Thompson v. State
green
1 sentence2000“When the State discloses evidence to the defendant after a trial has started, the focus of inquiry is on procedural prejudice.” Cohen v. State, 581 So.2d 926, 928 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)(citing Thompson v. State, 565 So.2d 1311 (Fla.1990)). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Barclay v. State green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Messer v. State
green
1 sentence1988The question merely sought to lay a foundation for further inquiry as to the portions of Hernandez's plea bargain which might adversely have affected his credibility and were therefore favorable to the defendant: the reduction of the charge and the imposition of an extremely lenient sentence. [2] See Barclay v. State, 343 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 1977), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 892 , 99 S.Ct. 249 , 58 L.Ed.2d 237 (1978); Messer v. State, 330 So.2d 137 (Fla. 1976); Stell v. State, 366 So.2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); see also Cowheard v. State, 365 So.2d 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 374 So.2d 101 | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Ramsey v. New York
green
1 sentence1988The question merely sought to lay a foundation for further inquiry as to the portions of Hernandez's plea bargain which might adversely have affected his credibility and were therefore favorable to the defendant: the reduction of the charge and the imposition of an extremely lenient sentence. [2] See Barclay v. State, 343 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 1977), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 892 , 99 S.Ct. 249 , 58 L.Ed.2d 237 (1978); Messer v. State, 330 So.2d 137 (Fla. 1976); Stell v. State, 366 So.2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); see also Cowheard v. State, 365 So.2d 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 374 So.2d 101 | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Ochoa v. Estelle green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Stell v. State green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.