punishment violation (Florida) · Go Syfert
← Florida issues

punishment violation in Florida

6 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1917–2013 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 (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Harper v. Gallowaygreen
fla · 1909 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 1917–1917
1 sentence

1917See Harper v. Galloway, 58 Fla. 255 , 51 South.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Connally v. General Construction Co. green
scotus · 1926
2 sentences

2013Id. at 393 , 46 S.Ct. 126 (citation omitted).

2013Id. at 393 , 46 S.Ct. 126 (citation omitted).

12013–2013
John Gund Brewing Co. v. United States neutral
ca8 · 1913
1 sentence

1961See Hamilton v. State, supra; John Gund Brewing Co. v. United States, 8 Cir., 1913, 206 F. 386 ; People v. Welch, 1928, 89 Cal. App. 18 , 264 P. 324 ; 15 C.J.S.

11961–1961
People v. Welch green
calctapp · 1928
2 sentences

1961See Hamilton v. State, supra; John Gund Brewing Co. v. United States, 8 Cir., 1913, 206 F. 386 ; People v. Welch, 1928, 89 Cal. App. 18 , 264 P. 324 ; 15 C.J.S.

1961See Hamilton v. State, supra; John Gund Brewing Co. v. United States, 8 Cir., 1913, 206 F. 386 ; People v. Welch, 1928, 89 Cal. App. 18 , 264 P. 324 ; 15 C.J.S.

11961–1961
Copeland v. State green
fla · 1954
1 sentence

1959In his petition for writ of habeas corpus the appellant contended that the sentence imposed in the judgment of the Circuit Court for Marion County was invalid under the decision of the Florida Supreme Court in Copeland v. State, Fla., 76 So.2d 137 ; that Sections 801.02 and 801.03, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., under which the sentence was imposed, was unconstitutional; that the act charged in the third count was a mere continuation of the act charged in the first count, of which the appellant was acquitted; that both Counts 2 and 3 failed to charge a definite and specific felony; that the languag

11959–1959
Bailey v. Poitier neutral
fla · 1923
1 sentence

1942This provision of the general power conferred upon all municipalities was considered by this Court in the ease of Bailey v. Poitier, 86 Fla. 160 , 97 So. 311 .

11942–1942
Weathers v. Tyler neutral
fla · 1923
1 sentence

1942This provision of the general power conferred upon all municipalities was considered by this Court in the ease of Bailey v. Poitier, 86 Fla. 160 , 97 So. 311 .

11942–1942
Hurvich v. State green
ala · 1935
2 sentences

1938The officers of the law may not be enjoined by a district court from enforcing the applicable statutes of Oklahoma providing a punishment for violation of the statutes of Oklahoma.” In the case of Hurvich v. State, 230 Ala. 578 , 162 Sou. 362 , in which the Supreme Court of Alabama had under consideration suit in equity to' declare a slot machine contraband and to be destroyed pursuant to the power contained in the legislative Act approved July 25, 1931, the Court said: “Appellant contends that it is not subject to condemnation and destruction because it is not shown ever to have been used for

1938The officers of the law may not be enjoined by a district court from enforcing the applicable statutes of Oklahoma providing a punishment for violation of the statutes of Oklahoma.” In the case of Hurvich v. State, 230 Ala. 578 , 162 Sou. 362 , in which the Supreme Court of Alabama had under consideration suit in equity to' declare a slot machine contraband and to be destroyed pursuant to the power contained in the legislative Act approved July 25, 1931, the Court said: “Appellant contends that it is not subject to condemnation and destruction because it is not shown ever to have been used for

11938–1938

Where else courts name it

TX 1386 (1920–2026) CA 50 (1925–2023) OH 19 (1971–2024) NY 14 (1903–2005) AL 13 (1919–2015) IL 12 (1916–2007) KY 10 (1938–2022) LA 9 (1939–2014) TN 9 (1949–2000) NJ 8 (1953–2021) NC 8 (1921–1985) PA 7 (1917–2018) GA 7 (1910–2010) WA 7 (1940–2024) IA 6 (1859–2018) MO 6 (1911–2013) NM 6 (1916–2020) FL 6 (1917–2013) OK 4 (1921–2006) IN 4 (1897–2004) MA 4 (1990–2019) KS 4 (1894–2020) MS 4 (1885–1985) AZ 3 (1966–1978) MI 3 (2007–2025) NE 3 (1909–1980) WI 3 (1913–2017) VA 2 (1984–2014) OR 2 (1919–1960) DE 2 (1964–1984) MT 2 (1959–2006) AK 2 (1985–2022) CO 2 (2004–2007) MD 2 (1987–2010) AR 2 (1921–1946) CT 2 (2009–2018) UT 2 (1987–1997) SD 2 (1893–2015) MN 2 (1970–2002)

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