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 2 courts 2001–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Slawson v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Trease v. State, 41 So. 3d 119, 124 (Fla. 2010) (citing Alston v. State, 894 So. 2d 46, 57 (Fla. 2004)). “[T]he relevant test for competency in the context of waiving collateral counsel and collateral proceedings in Florida is whether - 10 - the person seeking waiver has the capacity to ‘understand[ ] the consequences of waiving collateral counsel and proceedings.’ ” Slawson v. State, 796 So. 2d 491, 502 (Fla. 2001) (alteration in original) (quoting Durocher, 623 So. 2d at 485 )). 2010Further, “the rel evant test for competency in the context of waiving collateral counsel and collateral proceedings in Florida is whether the person seeking waiver has the capacity to ‘understand! ] the consequences of waiving collateral counsel and proceedings.’ ” Slawson, 796 So.2d at 502 (quoting Durocher, 623 So.2d at 485 ). | 1 | 4 |
Alston v. Stategreen1 sentence2021Trease v. State, 41 So. 3d 119, 124 (Fla. 2010) (citing Alston v. State, 894 So. 2d 46, 57 (Fla. 2004)). “[T]he relevant test for competency in the context of waiving collateral counsel and collateral proceedings in Florida is whether - 10 - the person seeking waiver has the capacity to ‘understand[ ] the consequences of waiving collateral counsel and proceedings.’ ” Slawson v. State, 796 So. 2d 491, 502 (Fla. 2001) (alteration in original) (quoting Durocher, 623 So. 2d at 485 )). | 1 | 1 |
Trease v. Stategreen1 sentence2021Trease v. State, 41 So. 3d 119, 124 (Fla. 2010) (citing Alston v. State, 894 So. 2d 46, 57 (Fla. 2004)). “[T]he relevant test for competency in the context of waiving collateral counsel and collateral proceedings in Florida is whether - 10 - the person seeking waiver has the capacity to ‘understand[ ] the consequences of waiving collateral counsel and proceedings.’ ” Slawson v. State, 796 So. 2d 491, 502 (Fla. 2001) (alteration in original) (quoting Durocher, 623 So. 2d at 485 )). | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Wisegreen1 sentence2010See In re Adoption of Baby James Doe, 572 So.2d 986, 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (quoting Knauer v. Barnett, 360 So.2d 399, 403 (Fla.1978)); see also Smith v. Wise, 234 So.2d 145, 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970) (“A child conceived in wedlock, but born after termination of the marriage is legitimate.”). | 1 | 1 |
Knauer v. Barnettgreen1 sentence2010See In re Adoption of Baby James Doe, 572 So.2d 986, 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (quoting Knauer v. Barnett, 360 So.2d 399, 403 (Fla.1978)); see also Smith v. Wise, 234 So.2d 145, 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970) (“A child conceived in wedlock, but born after termination of the marriage is legitimate.”). | 1 | 1 |
Johnston v. Stategreen1 sentence2004Later, in Slawson, 796 So.2d at 502 , this Court stated that Durocher "established that the relevant test for competency in the context of waiving collateral counsel and collateral proceedings in Florida is whether the person seeking waiver has the capacity to `understand[] the consequences of waiving collateral counsel and proceedings.'" Additionally, in Johnston v. State, 497 So.2d 863, 868 (Fla.1986), this Court stated that in determining whether a defendant has knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, a trial court should inquire into, among other things, the defendant's ag | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Durocher v. Singletary
green
2 sentences2021Trease v. State, 41 So. 3d 119, 124 (Fla. 2010) (citing Alston v. State, 894 So. 2d 46, 57 (Fla. 2004)). “[T]he relevant test for competency in the context of waiving collateral counsel and collateral proceedings in Florida is whether - 10 - the person seeking waiver has the capacity to ‘understand[ ] the consequences of waiving collateral counsel and proceedings.’ ” Slawson v. State, 796 So. 2d 491, 502 (Fla. 2001) (alteration in original) (quoting Durocher, 623 So. 2d at 485 )). 2010Further, “the rel evant test for competency in the context of waiving collateral counsel and collateral proceedings in Florida is whether the person seeking waiver has the capacity to ‘understand! ] the consequences of waiving collateral counsel and proceedings.’ ” Slawson, 796 So.2d at 502 (quoting Durocher, 623 So.2d at 485 ). | 4 | 2001–2021 |
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.