10 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2005 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Wimberlygreen2 sentences2005See State v. Wimberly, 498 So.2d 929, 931 (Fla.1986). 718 So.2d at 310 . 2000See State v. Wimberly, 498 So.2d 929, 932 (Fla.1986); Fryer v. State, 732 So.2d 30, 33 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). | 4 | 5 |
Thompson v. Stategreen2 sentences2005See Thompson v. State, 487 So.2d 311, 312 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 494 So.2d 1153 (Fla.1986). 1999See Thompson v. State, 487 So.2d 311, 312 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 494 So.2d 1153 (Fla.1986). | 3 | 4 |
Overway v. Stategreen2 sentences2005See State v. Wimberly, 498 So.2d 929, 931 (Fla.1986). 718 So.2d at 310 . 2004Overway v. State, 718 So.2d 308, 310 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). | 2 | 2 |
Wilson v. Stategreen1 sentence2003See Wilson v. State, 749 So.2d 516, 518-19 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). | 1 | 1 |
Fryer v. Stategreen1 sentence2000See State v. Wimberly, 498 So.2d 929, 932 (Fla.1986); Fryer v. State, 732 So.2d 30, 33 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). | 1 | 1 |
Viveros v. Stategreen1 sentence2000See State v. Espinosa, 686 So.2d 1345, 1348 (Fla.1996); Viveros v. State, 699 So.2d 822, 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Espinosagreen1 sentence2000See State v. Espinosa, 686 So.2d 1345, 1348 (Fla.1996); Viveros v. State, 699 So.2d 822, 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). | 1 | 1 |
Gray v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1996Further, "[w]henever the trial court improperly denies an alibi instruction, there is a `strong presumption of prejudice' to the defendant." Henderson, 619 A.2d at 19 (citing Gethers, 556 A.2d at 204 ); see also Gray, 549 A.2d at 351 . | 1 | 1 |
Gethers v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1996Specifically in Henderson , the court stated: Alibi instructions are not a precious commodity to be hoarded by the trial court; they should be granted liberally when there is any evidence to support them. "[W]hen a defendant requests an instruction on his theory of the case, including alibi, and when that instruction is supported by `any evidence, however weak,' an instruction stating the substance of the defense must be given." 619 A.2d at 19 (quoting Gethers v. United States, 556 A.2d 201, 204 (D.C.1989)). 1996Further, "[w]henever the trial court improperly denies an alibi instruction, there is a `strong presumption of prejudice' to the defendant." Henderson, 619 A.2d at 19 (citing Gethers, 556 A.2d at 204 ); see also Gray, 549 A.2d at 351 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY v. Nikollaj
green
1 sentence2005Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Nikollaj, 780 So.2d 943 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Henderson v. United States
green
2 sentences1996Specifically in Henderson , the court stated: Alibi instructions are not a precious commodity to be hoarded by the trial court; they should be granted liberally when there is any evidence to support them. "[W]hen a defendant requests an instruction on his theory of the case, including alibi, and when that instruction is supported by `any evidence, however weak,' an instruction stating the substance of the defense must be given." 619 A.2d at 19 (quoting Gethers v. United States, 556 A.2d 201, 204 (D.C.1989)). 1996Further, "[w]henever the trial court improperly denies an alibi instruction, there is a `strong presumption of prejudice' to the defendant." Henderson, 619 A.2d at 19 (citing Gethers, 556 A.2d at 204 ); see also Gray, 549 A.2d at 351 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
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.