laboratory analysis in Florida

6 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2015 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.

Followed or applied (15)

Case	Followed	Cited
United States v. Bruce Bellgreen ca8 · 1986 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015 1 sentence 2015See, e.g,, United States v. Bell, 785 F.2d 640, 643 (8th Cir. 1986) (“The urinalysis laboratory reports bear substantial indicia of reliability.	1	1
AA v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 1984 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
United States v. Robinsongreen ca1 · 1998 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
State v. Freemangreen ncctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 2 sentences 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
United States v. James Earl Paivagreen ca1 · 1989 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
cluster 542855green ca1 · 1990 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
Sharpe v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 1991 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
Eddie Griffin v. John Spratt and J. Kevin Kanegreen ca3 · 1992 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
State v. Rubiogreen nmctapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 2 sentences 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
State v. Hernandezgreen washctapp · 1997 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
Copeland v. Stategreen indctapp · 1982 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
United States v. Dwayne Dolangreen ca4 · 1976 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
Weaver v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 1989 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
Brooks v. Stategreen fla · 2000 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	1
Terry v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 2001 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007 1 sentence 2007See Terry v. State, 777 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

Case	Cited	Years
Gilberth v. State green fladistctapp · 1990 1 sentence 2015Id.	1	2015–2015
State v. Hernandez green washctapp · 1997 1 sentence 2008Compare A.A., 461 So.2d at 165 and Brooks, 762 So.2d at 892 with Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 963, 963-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (reversing probation violation where neither a laboratory analysis nor "any witness identif[ied] the substances as cocaine based on training or experience") and Weaver v. State, 543 So.2d 443, 443 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing a probation violation where officer testified "he believed the white powder was heroin but that he did not use his sense of smell, taste, or touch to form his opinion"); see also United States v. Robinson, 144 F.3d 104, 108 (1st Cir.1998) (permitting	1	2008–2008
Hayes v. State green fladistctapp · 1977 1 sentence 2007Hayes v. State, 345 So.2d 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).	1	2007–2007
Smith v. State green fladistctapp · 2003 1 sentence 2005However, the laboratory test showed the combined substances “contained a mixture of methamphetamine and other ingredients.” Id.	1	2005–2005
Davis v. State green fladistctapp · 1990 1 sentence 1994Hogan v. State, 583 So.2d 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Davis v. State, 562 So.2d 431 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).	1	1994–1994
Hogan v. State green fladistctapp · 1991 1 sentence 1994Hogan v. State, 583 So.2d 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Davis v. State, 562 So.2d 431 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).	1	1994–1994

Where else courts name it

NY 56 (1964–2024) CA 47 (1953–2025) TX 38 (1963–2025) IL 22 (1968–2025) OH 17 (1991–2026) VA 14 (1971–2024) MS 13 (1971–2015) NJ 12 (1986–2025) NM 9 (2001–2018) IN 7 (1931–2016) GA 7 (1977–2003) MD 7 (2000–2018) MO 6 (1940–2021) MA 6 (1940–2018) CT 6 (1938–2026) FL 6 (1994–2015) DC 6 (1991–2017) WA 5 (1984–2026) NC 5 (1961–2005) PA 5 (1971–2020) KS 4 (1927–2009) TN 4 (1995–2017) WI 4 (2014–2025) AK 4 (1971–2010) MN 4 (1965–2009) AZ 3 (1983–2022) NH 3 (1974–2007) AR 3 (1994–2020) LA 3 (1997–2012) MI 3 (1971–2015) ID 2 (2016–2016) MT 2 (1978–1991) VT 2 (1996–2003) NV 2 (1992–2020) SC 2 (2001–2001) IA 2 (2008–2008) OR 2 (1982–1991)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check