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.
8 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Downs v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Later, in its summary denial of Downs' 3.850 motion, the trial court again “ensured that the documents to which the defendant was entitled were provided to him.” Downs, 740 So. 2d at 511 . 2004Thus, trial counsel cannot be deemed ineffective under the standards set forth in Strickland for not objecting to the constitutional validity of these instructions." Id. at 517-18 (citations omitted). | 1 | 2 |
Downs v. Mooregreen1 sentence2020See Downs v. Moore, 801 So. 2d 906, 913 (Fla. 2001) (rejecting Downs’ claim that he was entitled to a mercy instruction and stating that “[t]his Court has held that the ‘catch-all’ standard jury instruction on nonstatutory mitigation when coupled with counsel’s right to argue mitigation is sufficient to advise the jury on nonstatutory mitigating circumstances”). | 1 | 1 |
Adams 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 |
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 |
Downs v. Stategreen1 sentence1990See Downs v. State, 453 So.2d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 1984) (motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 included Downs's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in both guilt and penalty phases of the original trial). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
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 |
Livingston v. State
green
1 sentence2001However, we find this claim to be without merit because Downs' motion to disqualify failed to demonstrate any bias or prejudice. *915 In Livingston v. State, 441 So.2d 1083 (Fla.1983), we set forth the requirements for a motion to disqualify a trial judge: First, there must be a verified statement of the specific facts which indicate a bias or prejudice requiring disqualification. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Mendyk v. State
green
1 sentence1999When considered in light of the State and JSO's assertion that all documents had been provided to collateral counsel, and in the absence of any colorable claim that handwritten police notes existed and were being withheld, we find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Downs' motion for production or for an evidentiary hearing on this point. [7] See Mendyk, 707 So.2d at 322 ; Mills, 684 So.2d at 805 . *512 Withheld Material, Exculpatory Evidence Next, Downs contends the State withheld and continues to withhold material, exculpatory evidence. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Mills v. State
green
1 sentence1999When considered in light of the State and JSO's assertion that all documents had been provided to collateral counsel, and in the absence of any colorable claim that handwritten police notes existed and were being withheld, we find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Downs' motion for production or for an evidentiary hearing on this point. [7] See Mendyk, 707 So.2d at 322 ; Mills, 684 So.2d at 805 . *512 Withheld Material, Exculpatory Evidence Next, Downs contends the State withheld and continues to withhold material, exculpatory evidence. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Finkelstein v. North Broward Hosp. Dist.
green
1 sentence1990We reversed that order in an opinion wherein we relied upon Finkelstein v. North Broward Hospital District, 484 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 1986), and Hollander v. Biscayne Cove, 546 So.2d 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Hollander v. Biscayne Cove
neutral
1 sentence1990We reversed that order in an opinion wherein we relied upon Finkelstein v. North Broward Hospital District, 484 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 1986), and Hollander v. Biscayne Cove, 546 So.2d 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.