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.
14 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1969–1996 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 |
|---|---|---|
Chandler v. Stategreen2 sentences1996We found that "at least two of the venire members for whom the State was granted cause challenges never came close to expressing the unyielding conviction and rigidity regarding the death penalty which would allow their excusal for cause under the Witherspoon standard." Id. at 173-74. 1996We found that "at least two of the venire members for whom the State was granted cause challenges never came close to expressing the unyielding conviction and rigidity regarding the death penalty which would allow their excusal for cause under the Witherspoon standard." Id. at 173-74. | 1 | 1 |
Sullivan v. Askewgreen1 sentence1977Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 , 88 S.Ct. 1770 , 20 L.Ed.2d 776 (1968). [1] See Sullivan v. Askew, 348 So.2d 312, 317 (Fla. 1977) (concurring opinion). [2] Appellant's execution has been scheduled for 8:30 a.m. on September 19. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Peelegreen2 sentences1969For voir dire procedure in light of Witherspoon used in other jurisdictions, see: State v. Peele, 274 N.C. 106 , 161 S.E.2d 568 at 573 (1968); Commonwealth v. Wilson, 431 Pa. 21 , 244 A.2d 734 at 739 (1968); and State v. Mathis, supra. Having considered the assignments of error and having examined the entire record as required by F.S. 924.32(2), F.S.A., we are satisfied that appellant was justly convicted and the judgment is affirmed. 1969For voir dire procedure in light of Witherspoon used in other jurisdictions, see: State v. Peele, 274 N.C. 106 , 161 S.E.2d 568 at 573 (1968); Commonwealth v. Wilson, 431 Pa. 21 , 244 A.2d 734 at 739 (1968); and State v. Mathis, supra. Having considered the assignments of error and having examined the entire record as required by F.S. 924.32(2), F.S.A., we are satisfied that appellant was justly convicted and the judgment is affirmed. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Wilsongreen2 sentences1969For voir dire procedure in light of Witherspoon used in other jurisdictions, see: State v. Peele, 274 N.C. 106 , 161 S.E.2d 568 at 573 (1968); Commonwealth v. Wilson, 431 Pa. 21 , 244 A.2d 734 at 739 (1968); and State v. Mathis, supra. Having considered the assignments of error and having examined the entire record as required by F.S. 924.32(2), F.S.A., we are satisfied that appellant was justly convicted and the judgment is affirmed. 1969For voir dire procedure in light of Witherspoon used in other jurisdictions, see: State v. Peele, 274 N.C. 106 , 161 S.E.2d 568 at 573 (1968); Commonwealth v. Wilson, 431 Pa. 21 , 244 A.2d 734 at 739 (1968); and State v. Mathis, supra. Having considered the assignments of error and having examined the entire record as required by F.S. 924.32(2), F.S.A., we are satisfied that appellant was justly convicted and the judgment is affirmed. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wainwright v. Witt
green
2 sentences1994The Witherspoon standard was modified in Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 , 105 S.Ct. 844 , 83 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985). 1994The Witherspoon standard was modified in Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 , 105 S.Ct. 844 , 83 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985). | 4 | 1985–1994 |
Witherspoon v. Illinois
green
2 sentences1983For in Witherspoon , the Supreme Court specifically stated that their holding does not "render invalid the conviction, as opposed to the sentence, in this or any other case." 391 U.S. at 522 n. 21, 88 S.Ct. at 1777 n. 21 (emphasis in original). 1983For in Witherspoon , the Supreme Court specifically stated that their holding does not "render invalid the conviction, as opposed to the sentence, in this or any other case." 391 U.S. at 522 n. 21, 88 S.Ct. at 1777 n. 21 (emphasis in original). | 4 | 1977–1983 |
Adams v. Texas
green
2 sentences1994Under Wainwright , a prospective juror can be excused for cause if the juror's views on capital punishment would "prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath." 469 U.S. at 424 , 105 S.Ct. at 852 (quoting Adams v. Texas, 448 U.S. 38, 45 , 100 S.Ct. 2521 , 65 L.Ed.2d 581 (1980)). 1994Under Wainwright , a prospective juror can be excused for cause if the juror's views on capital punishment would "prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath." 469 U.S. at 424 , 105 S.Ct. at 852 (quoting Adams v. Texas, 448 U.S. 38, 45 , 100 S.Ct. 2521 , 65 L.Ed.2d 581 (1980)). | 2 | 1985–1994 |
Maggard v. State
green
1 sentence1982Recently, in Maggard v. State, 399 So.2d 973 (Fla. 1981), we considered the necessity for an objection when a Witherspoon violation is claimed, and we explained the reason for requiring an objection. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Riley v. State
green
2 sentences1980We rejected this novel approach in Riley v. State, 366 So.2d 19 (Fla. 1978), and reaffirm that holding. 1980We rejected this novel approach in Riley v. State, 366 So.2d 19 (Fla. 1978), and reaffirm that holding. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Magill v. State
green
2 sentences1980We *335 most recently applied the Witherspoon test in Magill v. Florida, 386 So.2d 1188 (Fla. 1980). 1980We *335 most recently applied the Witherspoon test in Magill v. Florida, 386 So.2d 1188 (Fla. 1980). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Burch v. State
green
2 sentences1977Burch v. State, 343 So.2d 831 (Fla. 1977). 1977Burch v. State, 343 So.2d 831 (Fla. 1977). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
McCaskill v. State
green
2 sentences1977None of these cases addressed the issue of whether an alleged Witherspoon violation can be waived. [1] Williams v. State, 344 So.2d 1276 (Fla. 1977). 1977None of these cases addressed the issue of whether an alleged Witherspoon violation can be waived. [1] Williams v. State, 344 So.2d 1276 (Fla. 1977). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Williams v. Tennessee
green
2 sentences1972Wilson v. Florida, 403 U.S. 947 , 91 S.Ct. 2286 , 29 L.Ed.2d 858 . 1972Wilson v. Florida, 403 U.S. 947 , 91 S.Ct. 2286 , 29 L.Ed.2d 858 . | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Quintana v. Texas
green
2 sentences1972Wilson v. Florida, 403 U.S. 947 , 91 S.Ct. 2286 , 29 L.Ed.2d 858 . 1972Wilson v. Florida, 403 U.S. 947 , 91 S.Ct. 2286 , 29 L.Ed.2d 858 . | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Boulden v. Holman
green
2 sentences1971These cases are Boulden v. Holman, 394 U.S. 478 , 89 S.Ct. 1138 , 22 L.Ed.2d 433 (1969), and Maxwell v. Bishop, 398 U.S. 262 , 90 S.Ct. 1578 , 26 L.Ed.2d 221 (1970). 1971These cases are Boulden v. Holman, 394 U.S. 478 , 89 S.Ct. 1138 , 22 L.Ed.2d 433 (1969), and Maxwell v. Bishop, 398 U.S. 262 , 90 S.Ct. 1578 , 26 L.Ed.2d 221 (1970). | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Maxwell v. Bishop
green
2 sentences1971These cases are Boulden v. Holman, 394 U.S. 478 , 89 S.Ct. 1138 , 22 L.Ed.2d 433 (1969), and Maxwell v. Bishop, 398 U.S. 262 , 90 S.Ct. 1578 , 26 L.Ed.2d 221 (1970). 1971These cases are Boulden v. Holman, 394 U.S. 478 , 89 S.Ct. 1138 , 22 L.Ed.2d 433 (1969), and Maxwell v. Bishop, 398 U.S. 262 , 90 S.Ct. 1578 , 26 L.Ed.2d 221 (1970). | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Metzger v. State
green
2 sentences1969F.S. 932.20, F.S.A., the initial predecessor of which was enacted with essentially the same wording in 1868, specifies: "No person whose opinions are such as to preclude him from finding any defendant guilty of an offense punishable with death shall be allowed to serve as a juror on the trial of any capital case." (Emphasis supplied.) *380 In 1881, this court recognized that "the object of this statute is to prevent persons going upon a jury who would refuse from scruples of conscience to find a verdict of guilty, or for some reason other than a want of sufficient proof, and to procure juries 1969F.S. 932.20, F.S.A., the initial predecessor of which was enacted with essentially the same wording in 1868, specifies: "No person whose opinions are such as to preclude him from finding any defendant guilty of an offense punishable with death shall be allowed to serve as a juror on the trial of any capital case." (Emphasis supplied.) *380 In 1881, this court recognized that "the object of this statute is to prevent persons going upon a jury who would refuse from scruples of conscience to find a verdict of guilty, or for some reason other than a want of sufficient proof, and to procure juries | 1 | 1969–1969 |
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.