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 1974–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. Stategreen2 sentences2004In Davis v. State, 520 So.2d 572, 573-74 (Fla.1988) the supreme court stated: “The courts of this state have repeatedly held that the factors contributing to the results of a polygraph test — the skill of the operator, the emotional state of the person tested, the fallibility of the machine, and the lack of a specific quanti-tive relationship between physiological and emotional states — are such that the polygraph cannot be recognized as a sufficiently reliable or valid instrument to warrant its use in judicial proceedings unless both sides agree to its use.” The Fourth District Court of Appea 1995Strong ed. 1992) (at best, polygraph registers physiological correlates of anxiety, which is not the same thing as consciousness of guilt or lying; questions can provoke inner turmoil even when they are truthfully answered). [2] Davis v. State, 520 So.2d 572 (Fla. 1988) (factors contributing to the results of a polygraph test — the skill of operator, the emotional state of the person tested, the fallibility of the machine and the lack of a specific quantitative relationship between physiological and emotional states are such that the polygraph cannot be recognized as a sufficiently reliable or | 1 | 3 |
Farmer v. City of Fort Lauderdalegreen2 sentences2007Lauderdale, 427 So.2d 187 (Fla. 1983); Kaminski v. State, 63 So.2d 339 (Fla.1952)). 1988Farmer v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 427 So.2d 187, 190-191 (Fla.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 816 , 104 S.Ct. 74 , 78 L.Ed.2d 86 (1983). | 1 | 2 |
Cassamassima v. Stategreen1 sentence2007"The results of the polygraph examination shall not be used as evidence in court to prove that a violation of community supervision has occurred." § 948.30(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005); see also Cassamassima v. State, 657 So.2d 906, 910 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). [1] "The results of a polygraph test remain inadmissible in both civil and criminal cases because of unreliability." Lane v. State, 762 So.2d 560, 561 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (citing Farmer v. City of Ft. | 1 | 1 |
Lane v. Stategreen1 sentence2007"The results of the polygraph examination shall not be used as evidence in court to prove that a violation of community supervision has occurred." § 948.30(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005); see also Cassamassima v. State, 657 So.2d 906, 910 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). [1] "The results of a polygraph test remain inadmissible in both civil and criminal cases because of unreliability." Lane v. State, 762 So.2d 560, 561 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (citing Farmer v. City of Ft. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kaminski v. State
green
2 sentences1983In Kaminski v. State, 63 So.2d 339 (Fla. 1952), this Court, in relation to the admissibility of the results of a polygraph test to bolster the credibility of a prosecution witness, held that the use of such a mechanical device could not substitute for the "time-tested, time-tried, and time-honored discretion of the judgment of a jury as to matters of credibility." 63 So.2d at 341 . 1983In Kaminski v. State, 63 So.2d 339 (Fla. 1952), this Court, in relation to the admissibility of the results of a polygraph test to bolster the credibility of a prosecution witness, held that the use of such a mechanical device could not substitute for the "time-tested, time-tried, and time-honored discretion of the judgment of a jury as to matters of credibility." 63 So.2d at 341 . | 5 | 1974–2007 |
Anderson v. State
yellow
2 sentences1986Id. at 408. 1 DeLap, which Howard interpreted, reiterated that parties may stipulate to the admissibility of the results of a polygraph test, citing Anderson v. State, 241 So.2d 390 (Fla.1970), vacated, 408 U.S. 938 , 92 S.Ct. 2868 , 33 L.Ed.2d 758 (1972); State v. Brown, 177 So.2d 532 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). 1981Anderson v. State, 241 So.2d 390 (Fla.1970); Kaminski v. State, 63 So.2d 339 (Fla.1952). | 3 | 1974–1986 |
State v. Santiago
green
1 sentence2004In Davis v. State, 520 So.2d 572, 573-74 (Fla.1988) the supreme court stated: “The courts of this state have repeatedly held that the factors contributing to the results of a polygraph test — the skill of the operator, the emotional state of the person tested, the fallibility of the machine, and the lack of a specific quanti-tive relationship between physiological and emotional states — are such that the polygraph cannot be recognized as a sufficiently reliable or valid instrument to warrant its use in judicial proceedings unless both sides agree to its use.” The Fourth District Court of Appea | 1 | 2004–2004 |
City of Fort Lauderdale v. Farmer
green
2 sentences1988Farmer v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 427 So.2d 187, 190-191 (Fla.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 816 , 104 S.Ct. 74 , 78 L.Ed.2d 86 (1983). 1988Farmer v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 427 So.2d 187, 190-191 (Fla.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 816 , 104 S.Ct. 74 , 78 L.Ed.2d 86 (1983). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
State v. Brown
green
1 sentence1986Id. at 408. 1 DeLap, which Howard interpreted, reiterated that parties may stipulate to the admissibility of the results of a polygraph test, citing Anderson v. State, 241 So.2d 390 (Fla.1970), vacated, 408 U.S. 938 , 92 S.Ct. 2868 , 33 L.Ed.2d 758 (1972); State v. Brown, 177 So.2d 532 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Anderson v. Florida
neutral
2 sentences1986Id. at 408. 1 DeLap, which Howard interpreted, reiterated that parties may stipulate to the admissibility of the results of a polygraph test, citing Anderson v. State, 241 So.2d 390 (Fla.1970), vacated, 408 U.S. 938 , 92 S.Ct. 2868 , 33 L.Ed.2d 758 (1972); State v. Brown, 177 So.2d 532 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). 1986Id. at 408. 1 DeLap, which Howard interpreted, reiterated that parties may stipulate to the admissibility of the results of a polygraph test, citing Anderson v. State, 241 So.2d 390 (Fla.1970), vacated, 408 U.S. 938 , 92 S.Ct. 2868 , 33 L.Ed.2d 758 (1972); State v. Brown, 177 So.2d 532 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.