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 2008–2025 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Price v. Gray's Guard Service, Inc.green2 sentences2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. 2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. | 6 | 6 |
SHREITEH v. Stategreen2 sentences2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. 2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. | 3 | 3 |
Viera v. Stategreen2 sentences2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. 2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. | 3 | 3 |
Mobley v. Stategreen2 sentences2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. 2025See Oquendo v. State, 357 So. 3d 214 , 217 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (“The conduct of a person acting in self defense is measured by an objective standard, but the standard must be applied to the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the time of the altercation to the one acting in self defense.” (quoting Shreiteh v. State, 987 So. 2d 761, 763 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008))); State v. Quevedo, 357 So. 3d 1249 , 1253 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Thus the 17 objective standard of what is reasonable must be measured in light of the facts and circumstances as they appeared and were known to the individual defendant. | 2 | 4 |
Toledo v. Stategreen2 sentences2023That standard requires the court to determine whether, based on circumstances as they appeared to the defendant when he or she acted, a reasonable and prudent person situated in the same circumstances and knowing what the defendant knew would have used the same force as did the defendant”) (citing Mobley v. State, 132 So. 3d 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)); Toledo v. State, 452 So. 2d 661, 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (finding a person in the exercise of his right of self-defense may use only such force as a reasonable person, situated as he was and knowing what he knew, would have used under like circumst 2014See Toledo v. State, 452 So.2d 661, 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (“[A] person in the exercise of his right of self-defense may use ‘only such force as a reasonable person, situated as he was and knowing what he knew, would have used under like circumstances.’ ” (quoting People v. Moody, 62 Cal.App.2d 18 , 143 P.2d 978, 980 (1943))); see also Chaffin v. State, 121 So.3d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (confirming that the standard to be applied for determining whether a person is justified in using deadly force in self-defense is not a subjective standard as to the defendant’s state of mind, but an objective | 2 | 2 |
People v. Moodygreen2 sentences2014See Toledo v. State, 452 So.2d 661, 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (“[A] person in the exercise of his right of self-defense may use ‘only such force as a reasonable person, situated as he was and knowing what he knew, would have used under like circumstances.’ ” (quoting People v. Moody, 62 Cal.App.2d 18 , 143 P.2d 978, 980 (1943))); see also Chaffin v. State, 121 So.3d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (confirming that the standard to be applied for determining whether a person is justified in using deadly force in self-defense is not a subjective standard as to the defendant’s state of mind, but an objective 2014See Toledo v. State, 452 So.2d 661, 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (“[A] person in the exercise of his right of self-defense may use ‘only such force as a reasonable person, situated as he was and knowing what he knew, would have used under like circumstances.’ ” (quoting People v. Moody, 62 Cal.App.2d 18 , 143 P.2d 978, 980 (1943))); see also Chaffin v. State, 121 So.3d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (confirming that the standard to be applied for determining whether a person is justified in using deadly force in self-defense is not a subjective standard as to the defendant’s state of mind, but an objective | 1 | 1 |
Chaffin v. Stategreen1 sentence2014See Toledo v. State, 452 So.2d 661, 663 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (“[A] person in the exercise of his right of self-defense may use ‘only such force as a reasonable person, situated as he was and knowing what he knew, would have used under like circumstances.’ ” (quoting People v. Moody, 62 Cal.App.2d 18 , 143 P.2d 978, 980 (1943))); see also Chaffin v. State, 121 So.3d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (confirming that the standard to be applied for determining whether a person is justified in using deadly force in self-defense is not a subjective standard as to the defendant’s state of mind, but an objective | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.