12 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
Robinson v. Stategreen2 sentences2019See Robinson v. State, 707 So. 2d 688, 693 (Fla. 1998) (finding defendant’s Giglio claim procedurally barred because defendant failed to raise it on direct appeal). 2019See Robinson v. State , 707 So.2d 688 , 693 (Fla. 1998) (finding defendant's Giglio claim procedurally barred because defendant failed to raise it on direct appeal). | 3 | 3 |
Adams v. Stategreen2 sentences2003We accordingly remand this cause to the trial court to reconsider Downs' motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) on its merits in light of Burgess, 831 So.2d 137 . [1] See generally Adams v. State, 755 So.2d 678, 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (holding that movant may assert a Hale [2] claim in a rule 3.800(a) motion if the facts supporting the claim are apparent from the face of the record); Valdes v. State, 765 So.2d 774, 777 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (concluding that the appellant was entitled to relief because his Hale claim was apparent from the 2000In Adams v. State, 755 So.2d 678 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), the court acknowledged that the Callaway decision does not "irretrievably foreclose relief from consecutively imposed habitual offender sentences growing out of the same criminal episode by means of rule 3.800." See also Richardson v. State, 698 So.2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)(Allen J., dissenting). | 1 | 2 |
Yang Enterprises, Inc. v. Georgalisgreen1 sentence2023See Yang Enters., Inc. v. Georgalis, 988 So. 2d 1180, 1185 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (“To avoid liability, counsel must 24 make an objectively reasonable investigation of the purported facts supporting a claim.”). | 1 | 1 |
City of Riviera Beach v. Reedgreen1 sentence2018City of Riviera Beach v. Reed, 987 So. 2d 168, 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
cluster 72625green1 sentence2008Junior v. Reed, 693 So.2d 586, 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); see also GJR Invs., Inc. v. County of Escambia, Fla., 132 F.3d 1359, 1367 (11th Cir.1998) (reversing denial of defendants’ motions to dismiss on grounds of qualified immunity after reviewing whether the complaint alleged that defendants’ actions violated a clearly established right). | 1 | 1 |
Junior v. Reedgreen1 sentence2008Junior v. Reed, 693 So.2d 586, 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); see also GJR Invs., Inc. v. County of Escambia, Fla., 132 F.3d 1359, 1367 (11th Cir.1998) (reversing denial of defendants’ motions to dismiss on grounds of qualified immunity after reviewing whether the complaint alleged that defendants’ actions violated a clearly established right). | 1 | 1 |
Valdes v. Stategreen1 sentence2003We accordingly remand this cause to the trial court to reconsider Downs' motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) on its merits in light of Burgess, 831 So.2d 137 . [1] See generally Adams v. State, 755 So.2d 678, 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (holding that movant may assert a Hale [2] claim in a rule 3.800(a) motion if the facts supporting the claim are apparent from the face of the record); Valdes v. State, 765 So.2d 774, 777 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (concluding that the appellant was entitled to relief because his Hale claim was apparent from the | 1 | 1 |
Collins v. Collinsgreen1 sentence2002Id. at 1047 ; see also Collins v. Collins, 519 So.2d 729, 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Arizona v. Youngblood
green
2 sentences2009In Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 58 , 109 S.Ct. 333 , 102 L.Ed.2d 281 (1988), the Court addressed “the failure of the State to preserve evidentiary material of which no more can be said than that it could have been subjected to tests, the results of which might have exonerated the defendant.” Id. at 57 , 109 S.Ct. 333 . 2009In Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 58 , 109 S.Ct. 333 , 102 L.Ed.2d 281 (1988), the Court addressed “the failure of the State to preserve evidentiary material of which no more can be said than that it could have been subjected to tests, the results of which might have exonerated the defendant.” Id. at 57 , 109 S.Ct. 333 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Burgess v. State
green
1 sentence2003We accordingly remand this cause to the trial court to reconsider Downs' motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) on its merits in light of Burgess, 831 So.2d 137 . [1] See generally Adams v. State, 755 So.2d 678, 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (holding that movant may assert a Hale [2] claim in a rule 3.800(a) motion if the facts supporting the claim are apparent from the face of the record); Valdes v. State, 765 So.2d 774, 777 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (concluding that the appellant was entitled to relief because his Hale claim was apparent from the | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Abray Construction Company, Inc. v. Star Swimming Pools, Inc.
green
1 sentence2002Id. at 1047 ; see also Collins v. Collins, 519 So.2d 729, 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Richardson v. State
green
1 sentence2000In Adams v. State, 755 So.2d 678 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), the court acknowledged that the Callaway decision does not "irretrievably foreclose relief from consecutively imposed habitual offender sentences growing out of the same criminal episode by means of rule 3.800." See also Richardson v. State, 698 So.2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)(Allen J., dissenting). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
AR Moyer, Inc. v. Graham
green
1 sentence1981Moyer, Inc. v. Graham, 285 So.2d 397 (Fla. 1973). [5] Sachse v. Tampa Music Co., supra. [6] Although the statute of limitations defense is ordinarily brought as an affirmative defense, the trial judge was correct in her statement that the statute of limitations may be raised by motion to dismiss if the facts supporting the defense appear on the face of the complaint. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
State v. Talavera
green
1 sentence1974As the State did not call Hess, Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968) does not apply and Gaskin in moving for a severance did not comply with the requirements of State v. Talavera (Fla. 1971), 243 So.2d 595 . | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Bruton v. United States
green
2 sentences1974As the State did not call Hess, Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968) does not apply and Gaskin in moving for a severance did not comply with the requirements of State v. Talavera (Fla. 1971), 243 So.2d 595 . 1974As the State did not call Hess, Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968) does not apply and Gaskin in moving for a severance did not comply with the requirements of State v. Talavera (Fla. 1971), 243 So.2d 595 . | 1 | 1974–1974 |
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.