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.
6 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1991–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gaskin v. Stategreen2 sentences2017This Court summarily rejected Gaskin’s claim on direct appeal, stating: “We also reject without discussion Gaskin’s multiple assertions regarding the constitutionality of the capital-sentencing statute as each of his arguments has previously been decided adversely to his position.” Gaskin v. State, 591 So. 2d 917, 920 (Fla. 1991). 2017This Court summarily rejected Gaskin’s claim on direct appeal, stating: “We also reject without discussion Gaskin’s multiple assertions regarding the constitutionality of the capital-sentencing statute as each of his arguments has previously been decided adversely to his position.” Gaskin v. State, 591 So.2d 917, 920 (Fla. 1991). | 2 | 2 |
Gaskin v. Stategreen2 sentences2009Robinson, 707 So.2d at 690 nn. 1, 2 (finding “Robinson’s race discrimination claim” procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal); see also Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 , 512 n. 5, 513 n. 6 (Fla.1999) (finding Gaskin’s claim that he “was denied a fair trial based on a discriminatory jury selection process” procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal), receded from on other grounds by Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004). 2009Robinson, 707 So.2d at 690 nn. 1, 2 (finding "Robinson's race discrimination claim" procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal); see also Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 , 512 n. 5, 513 n. 6 (Fla.1999) (finding Gaskin's claim that he "was denied a fair trial based on a discriminatory jury selection process" procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal), receded from on other grounds by Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004). | 1 | 2 |
James Ernest Hitchcock v. State of Floridagreen2 sentences2018After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513 , 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), Gaskin responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case. 2018See Hitchcock , 226 So.3d at 217 ; Gaskin , 218 So.3d at 401 (denying Gaskin's claim to relief under Hurst v. Florida ). | 1 | 1 |
Louis B. Gaskin v. State of Floridagreen1 sentence2018See Hitchcock , 226 So.3d at 217 ; Gaskin , 218 So.3d at 401 (denying Gaskin's claim to relief under Hurst v. Florida ). | 1 | 1 |
Dennis v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See Dennis v. State, 109 So. 3d 680, 698 (Fla. 2012) (holding that claims were procedurally barred because the movant could have raised them on direct appeal). -4- Finally, Gaskin’s argues that he is entitled to relief in light of Hurst v. Florida. 2017See Dennis v. State, 109 So.3d 680, 698 (Fla. 2012) (holding that claims were procedurally barred because the movant could have raised them on direct appeal). | 1 | 1 |
Nelson v. Stategreen2 sentences2009Robinson, 707 So.2d at 690 nn. 1, 2 (finding “Robinson’s race discrimination claim” procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal); see also Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 , 512 n. 5, 513 n. 6 (Fla.1999) (finding Gaskin’s claim that he “was denied a fair trial based on a discriminatory jury selection process” procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal), receded from on other grounds by Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004). 2009Robinson, 707 So.2d at 690 nn. 1, 2 (finding "Robinson's race discrimination claim" procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal); see also Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 , 512 n. 5, 513 n. 6 (Fla.1999) (finding Gaskin's claim that he "was denied a fair trial based on a discriminatory jury selection process" procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal), receded from on other grounds by Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004). | 1 | 1 |
Gilliam v. Stategreen1 sentence2002Gilliam, 582 So.2d at 611-12 (footnote omitted). [18] The trial court found the following nonstatutory mitigation: (1) the defendant was brought up in a broken home and was subjected to physical abuse; and (2) the defendant's current wife, his mother, and other family members love him and desire that his life be spared. [19] Cf. Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 (Fla. 1999) (reversing lower court's summary denial of Gaskin's claim that trial counsel's penalty phase closing argument was deficient in that it failed to address aggravating and mitigating circumstances where counsel presented extremel | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Statered1 sentence1991See, e.g., Brown v. State, 565 So.2d 304 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 111 S.Ct. 537 , 112 L.Ed.2d 547 (1990). | 1 | 1 |
Bruno v. Stategreen1 sentence1991See Bruno v. State, 574 So.2d 76, 81 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.Ct. 112 , 116 L.Ed.2d 81 (1991). | 1 | 1 |
Wilson Sporting Goods Co. v. David Geoffrey & Associatesgreen1 sentence1991See, e.g., Brown v. State, 565 So.2d 304 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 111 S.Ct. 537 , 112 L.Ed.2d 547 (1990). | 1 | 1 |
Ahferom v. Michigan Bureau of Workers Disability Compensationgreen2 sentences1991See Bruno v. State, 574 So.2d 76, 81 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.Ct. 112 , 116 L.Ed.2d 81 (1991). 1991See Bruno v. State, 574 So.2d 76, 81 (Fla.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.Ct. 112 , 116 L.Ed.2d 81 (1991). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hurst v. Florida
green
2 sentences2018V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Gaskin's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616 , 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State ( Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161 , 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). 2018V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Gaskin's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616 , 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State ( Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161 , 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). | 2 | 2017–2018 |
Allen v. United States
green
1 sentence2018After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513 , 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), Gaskin responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Sedlak v. Smith
green
1 sentence2018After this Court decided Hitchcock v. State , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513 , 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), Gaskin responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in this case. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Gary Czajkowski v. State of Florida
red
1 sentence2018V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Gaskin's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616 , 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State ( Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161 , 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Cleveland v. Sharp
green
1 sentence2018V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Gaskin's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616 , 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State ( Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161 , 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Florida v. Hurst
red
1 sentence2018V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Gaskin's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616 , 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in Hurst v. State ( Hurst ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161 , 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Robinson v. State
green
2 sentences2009Robinson, 707 So.2d at 690 nn. 1, 2 (finding “Robinson’s race discrimination claim” procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal); see also Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 , 512 n. 5, 513 n. 6 (Fla.1999) (finding Gaskin’s claim that he “was denied a fair trial based on a discriminatory jury selection process” procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal), receded from on other grounds by Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004). 2009Robinson, 707 So.2d at 690 nn. 1, 2 (finding "Robinson's race discrimination claim" procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal); see also Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 , 512 n. 5, 513 n. 6 (Fla.1999) (finding Gaskin's claim that he "was denied a fair trial based on a discriminatory jury selection process" procedurally barred for failure to raise it on direct appeal), receded from on other grounds by Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Clark v. State
green
1 sentence2002Gilliam, 582 So.2d at 611-12 (footnote omitted). [18] The trial court found the following nonstatutory mitigation: (1) the defendant was brought up in a broken home and was subjected to physical abuse; and (2) the defendant's current wife, his mother, and other family members love him and desire that his life be spared. [19] Cf. Gaskin v. State, 737 So.2d 509 (Fla. 1999) (reversing lower court's summary denial of Gaskin's claim that trial counsel's penalty phase closing argument was deficient in that it failed to address aggravating and mitigating circumstances where counsel presented extremel | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Caldwell v. Mississippi
green
2 sentences1999Therefore, because Gaskin's sentence did not become final until October 12, 1993, he had until October 12, 1995, to file a motion for postconviction relief. [4] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). [5] These issues include: (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying Gaskin's amended 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on grounds that the claims were procedurally barred as successive; (2) the trial court erred in denying Gaskin's motion on the ground he failed to allege names and availability of witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in not ordering the state to provide the prosecutor' 1999Therefore, because Gaskin's sentence did not become final until October 12, 1993, he had until October 12, 1995, to file a motion for postconviction relief. [4] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). [5] These issues include: (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying Gaskin's amended 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on grounds that the claims were procedurally barred as successive; (2) the trial court erred in denying Gaskin's motion on the ground he failed to allege names and availability of witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in not ordering the state to provide the prosecutor' | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Huff v. State
green
1 sentence1999Therefore, because Gaskin's sentence did not become final until October 12, 1993, he had until October 12, 1995, to file a motion for postconviction relief. [4] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). [5] These issues include: (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying Gaskin's amended 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on grounds that the claims were procedurally barred as successive; (2) the trial court erred in denying Gaskin's motion on the ground he failed to allege names and availability of witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in not ordering the state to provide the prosecutor' | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Lopez v. Singletary
green
2 sentences1999In Lopez v. Singletary, 634 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1993), we held "that any postconviction movant dissatisfied with the response to any requested access must pursue the issue before the trial judge or that issue will be waived." Id. at 1058 . 1999In Lopez v. Singletary, 634 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1993), we held "that any postconviction movant dissatisfied with the response to any requested access must pursue the issue before the trial judge or that issue will be waived." Id. at 1058 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Mullaney v. Wilbur
green
2 sentences1999Therefore, because Gaskin's sentence did not become final until October 12, 1993, he had until October 12, 1995, to file a motion for postconviction relief. [4] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). [5] These issues include: (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying Gaskin's amended 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on grounds that the claims were procedurally barred as successive; (2) the trial court erred in denying Gaskin's motion on the ground he failed to allege names and availability of witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in not ordering the state to provide the prosecutor' 1999Therefore, because Gaskin's sentence did not become final until October 12, 1993, he had until October 12, 1995, to file a motion for postconviction relief. [4] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). [5] These issues include: (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying Gaskin's amended 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on grounds that the claims were procedurally barred as successive; (2) the trial court erred in denying Gaskin's motion on the ground he failed to allege names and availability of witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in not ordering the state to provide the prosecutor' | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Ake v. Oklahoma
green
2 sentences1999Therefore, because Gaskin's sentence did not become final until October 12, 1993, he had until October 12, 1995, to file a motion for postconviction relief. [4] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). [5] These issues include: (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying Gaskin's amended 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on grounds that the claims were procedurally barred as successive; (2) the trial court erred in denying Gaskin's motion on the ground he failed to allege names and availability of witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in not ordering the state to provide the prosecutor' 1999Therefore, because Gaskin's sentence did not become final until October 12, 1993, he had until October 12, 1995, to file a motion for postconviction relief. [4] Huff v. State, 622 So.2d 982 (Fla.1993). [5] These issues include: (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying Gaskin's amended 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on grounds that the claims were procedurally barred as successive; (2) the trial court erred in denying Gaskin's motion on the ground he failed to allege names and availability of witnesses; (3) the trial court erred in not ordering the state to provide the prosecutor' | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.