10 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bradley v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Porter’s reasoning has continued to be relied upon in more recent district court cases involving similar facts: • State v. Savage, 589 So. 2d 1016, 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (the defendant was sentenced on two cases to a prison term to be followed by a probation term; while serving the prison term, the 9 defendant was sentenced in another county to a prison term “consecutive to any sentence currently being served”; after being released, the defendant was charged with violating the first two cases’ probation; the defendant filed a rule 3.850 motion, alleging the first two cases’ probation term h | 1 | 1 |
Crawley v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Porter’s reasoning has continued to be relied upon in more recent district court cases involving similar facts: • State v. Savage, 589 So. 2d 1016, 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (the defendant was sentenced on two cases to a prison term to be followed by a probation term; while serving the prison term, the 9 defendant was sentenced in another county to a prison term “consecutive to any sentence currently being served”; after being released, the defendant was charged with violating the first two cases’ probation; the defendant filed a rule 3.850 motion, alleging the first two cases’ probation term h | 1 | 1 |
State v. Savagegreen1 sentence2020Porter’s reasoning has continued to be relied upon in more recent district court cases involving similar facts: • State v. Savage, 589 So. 2d 1016, 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (the defendant was sentenced on two cases to a prison term to be followed by a probation term; while serving the prison term, the 9 defendant was sentenced in another county to a prison term “consecutive to any sentence currently being served”; after being released, the defendant was charged with violating the first two cases’ probation; the defendant filed a rule 3.850 motion, alleging the first two cases’ probation term h | 1 | 1 |
Schurman v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Porter’s reasoning has continued to be relied upon in more recent district court cases involving similar facts: • State v. Savage, 589 So. 2d 1016, 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (the defendant was sentenced on two cases to a prison term to be followed by a probation term; while serving the prison term, the 9 defendant was sentenced in another county to a prison term “consecutive to any sentence currently being served”; after being released, the defendant was charged with violating the first two cases’ probation; the defendant filed a rule 3.850 motion, alleging the first two cases’ probation term h | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Alabamagreen1 sentence2018See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012); Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010); Kelsey v. State, 206 So. 3d 5 (Fla. 2016); Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla 2016). | 1 | 1 |
Freeman v. Stategreen1 sentence2012The law is clear that “where a sentence has already been served, even if it is an illegal sentence, the court lacks jurisdiction and would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause by resentencing the defendant to an increased sentence.” Sneed v. State, 749 So.2d 545, 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); see also Willingham v. State, 833 So.2d 237, 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Palmer v. State, 182 So.2d 625, 626-27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966). | 1 | 1 |
Willingham v. Stategreen1 sentence2012The law is clear that “where a sentence has already been served, even if it is an illegal sentence, the court lacks jurisdiction and would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause by resentencing the defendant to an increased sentence.” Sneed v. State, 749 So.2d 545, 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); see also Willingham v. State, 833 So.2d 237, 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Palmer v. State, 182 So.2d 625, 626-27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966). | 1 | 1 |
Sneed v. Stategreen1 sentence2012The law is clear that “where a sentence has already been served, even if it is an illegal sentence, the court lacks jurisdiction and would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause by resentencing the defendant to an increased sentence.” Sneed v. State, 749 So.2d 545, 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); see also Willingham v. State, 833 So.2d 237, 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Palmer v. State, 182 So.2d 625, 626-27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Graham v. Florida
green
2 sentences2013In November 2010, the defendant filed a rule 3.800(a) motion to correct sentence, arguing that his life sentence on the kidnapping conviction violated Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 , 130 S.Ct. 2011 , 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), which held that, under the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, a juvenile offender cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for committing a non-homicide crime. 2013In November 2010, the defendant filed a rule 3.800(a) motion to correct sentence, arguing that his life sentence on the kidnapping conviction violated Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 , 130 S.Ct. 2011 , 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), which held that, under the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, a juvenile offender cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for committing a non-homicide crime. | 2 | 2013–2018 |
White v. State
green
2 sentences2009Id. at 896 . 2001Id. at 895-96 . | 2 | 2001–2009 |
Thomas Kelsey v. State of Florida
green
1 sentence2018See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012); Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010); Kelsey v. State, 206 So. 3d 5 (Fla. 2016); Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla 2016). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Angelo Atwell v. State of Florida
red
1 sentence2018See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012); Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010); Kelsey v. State, 206 So. 3d 5 (Fla. 2016); Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla 2016). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Wilson v. State
green
1 sentence2015Id. at 224 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Snipes v. State
green
1 sentence2004Id. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Leroux
green
1 sentence2002The supreme court reiterated that the courts have long held that "a defendant may be entitled to withdraw a plea entered in reliance upon his attorney's mistaken advice about sentencing." Id. at 237 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
State v. Callaway
green
1 sentence2000This motion was denied on the authority of State v. Callaway, 658 So.2d 983 (Fla. 1995). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Dixon v. State
green
1 sentence2000He argued that the motion was timely under Dixon v. State, 730 So.2d 265 (Fla.1999), in which the supreme court extended the time limitation for a defendant to assert a Hale claim until two years after the date the mandate issued in Callaway . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.