16 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1975–2007 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hewett v. Stategreen1 sentence2007See Moore v. State, 724 So.2d 117, 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (citing Hewett v. State, 613 So.2d 1305 (Fla.1993)); White v. State, 693 So.2d 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Laing v. State, 622 So.2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Moore v. Stategreen1 sentence2007See Moore v. State, 724 So.2d 117, 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (citing Hewett v. State, 613 So.2d 1305 (Fla.1993)); White v. State, 693 So.2d 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Laing v. State, 622 So.2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
George v. Stategreen1 sentence1995Manies v. State, 621 So.2d 679 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); see also George v. State, 577 So.2d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). | 1 | 1 |
Wilson v. Stategreen1 sentence1992See Wilson v. State, 567 So.2d 425 (Fla. 1990). | 1 | 1 |
Hall v. Stategreen1 sentence1990See Hall v. State, 517 So.2d 678, 679-80 (Fla. 1988). | 1 | 1 |
Alfonso v. Stategreen1 sentence1990See Alfonso v. State, 561 So.2d 1207, 1208 (Fla.3d DCA 1990). | 1 | 1 |
Melvin v. Stategreen1 sentence1989See also Melvin v. State, 553 So.2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). | 1 | 1 |
Earman v. Stategreen1 sentence1975See Earman v. State, Fla.1972, 265 So.2d 695 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lomax v. State
green
2 sentences1981The opinion of the district court reads: The State confesses error because the information filed in this case specifically states "said property being the subject of larceny" and, therefore, under the holdings in Lomax v. State, 345 So.2d 719 (Fla. 1977) and Abreau v. State, 347 So.2d 819 (Fla.3d DCA 1977), the refusal to instruct on the lesser included offense of larceny constitutes reversible error. 1978The State confesses error because the information filed in this case specifically states "said property being the subject of larceny" and, therefore, under the holdings in Lomax v. State, 345 So.2d 719 (Fla. 1977) and Abreau v. State, 347 So.2d 819 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), the refusal to instruct on the lesser included offense of larceny constitutes reversible error. | 2 | 1978–1981 |
Abreau v. State
green
2 sentences1981The opinion of the district court reads: The State confesses error because the information filed in this case specifically states "said property being the subject of larceny" and, therefore, under the holdings in Lomax v. State, 345 So.2d 719 (Fla. 1977) and Abreau v. State, 347 So.2d 819 (Fla.3d DCA 1977), the refusal to instruct on the lesser included offense of larceny constitutes reversible error. 1978The State confesses error because the information filed in this case specifically states "said property being the subject of larceny" and, therefore, under the holdings in Lomax v. State, 345 So.2d 719 (Fla. 1977) and Abreau v. State, 347 So.2d 819 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), the refusal to instruct on the lesser included offense of larceny constitutes reversible error. | 2 | 1978–1981 |
White v. State
neutral
1 sentence2007See Moore v. State, 724 So.2d 117, 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (citing Hewett v. State, 613 So.2d 1305 (Fla.1993)); White v. State, 693 So.2d 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Laing v. State, 622 So.2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Laing v. State
neutral
1 sentence2007See Moore v. State, 724 So.2d 117, 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (citing Hewett v. State, 613 So.2d 1305 (Fla.1993)); White v. State, 693 So.2d 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Laing v. State, 622 So.2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Smith v. State
green
1 sentence2004The State confesses error based on our recent decision in Smith v. State, 845 So.2d 937 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Manies v. State
green
1 sentence1995Manies v. State, 621 So.2d 679 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); see also George v. State, 577 So.2d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Glass v. State
green
1 sentence1993Although courts *1036 are authorized to impose probationary split sentences, Glass v. State, 574 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 1991), the total sentence cannot exceed the sentencing guidelines without providing contemporaneous written reasons for a departure. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
State v. Stevens
green
1 sentence1991We affirm the trial court's denial of the motion to suppress on the authority of State v. Stevens, 354 So.2d 1244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Blanco v. State, 452 So.2d 520 (Fla.1984). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Blanco v. State
green
1 sentence1991We affirm the trial court's denial of the motion to suppress on the authority of State v. Stevens, 354 So.2d 1244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Blanco v. State, 452 So.2d 520 (Fla.1984). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Lamb v. State
green
1 sentence1989Lamb v. State, 532 So.2d 1051 (Fla.1988); Brooks v. State, 505 So.2d 639 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Eutsey v. State
green
1 sentence1989Eutsey v. State, 383 So.2d 219 (Fla. 1980); § 775.084(3)(d), Fla. Stat. (1987). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Green
red
1 sentence1989The state confesses error on the authority of State v. Green, 547 So.2d 925 (Fla.1989). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Brooks v. State
green
1 sentence1989Lamb v. State, 532 So.2d 1051 (Fla.1988); Brooks v. State, 505 So.2d 639 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Sapp v. State
green
1 sentence1987Appellant would be entitled to three days of jail credit against any incarcerative sentence. [See Sapp v. State, 445 So.2d 1088 (1st DCA 1980).] In Scott, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle announced in Argersinger , but refused to extend the Sixth Amendment to cases where imprisonment was authorized but not imposed. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
SR v. State
green
1 sentence1978Upon the authority of Section 39.05(7), Florida Statutes (1975) and S. R. v. State, 346 So.2d 1018 (Fla.1977), we find that the petition should have been dismissed with prejudice and, therefore, reverse the adjudication of delinquency. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
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.