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.
10 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Randall v. Stategreen1 sentence2018Balsinger, 974 So. 2d at 593 ; see, e.g., Randall v. -9- State, 741 So. 2d 1183, 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (reversing and remanding order revoking defendant's community control due to the constitutionally inadequate revocation hearing "with nothing in this record approaching a knowing waiver of hearing or a knowing admission to the alleged violations"). | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Mooregreen1 sentence2008Having recognized the body of law holding that probation and community control do not qualify under the 1993 sentencing scheme as an "other commitment," and that simply being in custody on a probation, community control, or parole violation warrant that never materializes into a finding of guilt as to the violation and the imposition of an additional sentence of incarceration, does not constitute an "other commitment," we conclude, as the First District concluded in Smith v. Moore, 782 So.2d 955, 957 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), that the imposition of the additional six-month sentence after a finding | 1 | 1 |
Braxton v. Stategreen1 sentence1999See Braxton v. State, 524 So.2d 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). | 1 | 1 |
Lambert v. Stategreen1 sentence1989See Lambert v. State, 545 So.2d 838 (Fla. 1989). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
The Florida Bar v. Bauman
green
1 sentence2019Id. at 998 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Balsinger v. State
green
1 sentence2018Balsinger, 974 So. 2d at 593 ; see, e.g., Randall v. -9- State, 741 So. 2d 1183, 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (reversing and remanding order revoking defendant's community control due to the constitutionally inadequate revocation hearing "with nothing in this record approaching a knowing waiver of hearing or a knowing admission to the alleged violations"). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Zeigler v. State
green
1 sentence2011Nothing in the record supports the imposition of the condition as being “reasonably related to [the] defendant’s rehabilitation.” Zeigler, 647 So.2d at 274 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Kasischke v. State
green
1 sentence2008Id. at 1157 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Wright v. State
green
1 sentence1999Spell relies on this court's opinion in Wright v. State, 707 So.2d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), to advance his argument that a scoresheet error is reviewable at resentencing after a community control violation, even when there was no objection at the original sentencing. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Anders v. California
green
2 sentences1992His counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) averring that he could make no good faith argument for reversi ble error, save that the written probation order reflected a special condition not orally pronounced at sentencing. 1992His counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) averring that he could make no good faith argument for reversi ble error, save that the written probation order reflected a special condition not orally pronounced at sentencing. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Wyche v. State
green
1 sentence1992Alloway argues that, under Wyche v. State, 576 So.2d 884 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), the trial court improperly used the “Drugs” scoresheet. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.