6 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1977–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
Logan v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Indeed, under Logan v. State, 846 So. 2d 472, 475 (Fla. 2003), a pro se motion filed by a criminal 2 The following prefatory language appears in the order: “the Motion being insufficient in support of the relief prayed.” It is unclear whether, by including this language in the order, the trial court intended to address the merits of Ross’s claim. 2023Indeed, under Logan v. State, 846 So. 2d 472, 475 (Fla. 2003), a pro se motion filed by a criminal 2 The following prefatory language appears in the order: “the Motion being insufficient in support of the relief prayed.” It is unclear whether, by including this language in the order, the trial court intended to address the merits of Ross’s claim. | 1 | 1 |
Farancz v. St. Mary's Hospital, Inc.green1 sentence2004Accord Farancz, 585 So.2d 1151 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Sallatogreen1 sentence1998Compare infra op. at ___ with State v. Sallato, 519 So.2d 605 (Fla.1988)(affirmative misadvice about deportation consequences grounds for Rule 3.850 postconviction relief). [2] As a general note, the problem facing these defendants stems from recent congressional immigration law amendments. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Moore v. State
green
2 sentences2015Id. at 560 . 2015Id. at 560 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Gomez v. Singletary
green
1 sentence2002In Gomez v. Singletary, 733 So.2d 499 (Fla.1998), the Florida Supreme Court held that prisoners are entitled to the benefit of statutory programs to alleviate prison overcrowding which were in effect at the time of their offenses. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
United States v. John E. Jones
green
2 sentences1977Cf. Dickey v. Florida, supra, wherein the court "incorporated" or "absorbed" into the Fourteenth Amendment the "speedy trial" provision of the Sixth Amendment. [8] United States v. Jones, 173 U.S.App.D.C. 280 , 524 F.2d 834 (1975). [9] It is noted that our sister court in State v. Freeman, 276 So.2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), declined to apply the Ross rule to a 39-day factual situation, and had we such facts in the instant case, we would have likewise held. 1977Cf. Dickey v. Florida, supra, wherein the court "incorporated" or "absorbed" into the Fourteenth Amendment the "speedy trial" provision of the Sixth Amendment. [8] United States v. Jones, 173 U.S.App.D.C. 280 , 524 F.2d 834 (1975). [9] It is noted that our sister court in State v. Freeman, 276 So.2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), declined to apply the Ross rule to a 39-day factual situation, and had we such facts in the instant case, we would have likewise held. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Barker v. Wingo
green
2 sentences1977Their observation as to the inflexibility and inviability of the Florida statute of limitations, in our opinion, cannot stand either state or federal constitutional muster. [10] Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 , 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972). [11] Article I, Section 9, Florida Constitution (1968). [12] 33 Fla. Stat.Annot., Author's comment states: "Rule 3.220 is perhaps the most comprehensive attempt in America to consolidate available and new discovery devices in criminal practice... ." 1977Their observation as to the inflexibility and inviability of the Florida statute of limitations, in our opinion, cannot stand either state or federal constitutional muster. [10] Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 , 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972). [11] Article I, Section 9, Florida Constitution (1968). [12] 33 Fla. Stat.Annot., Author's comment states: "Rule 3.220 is perhaps the most comprehensive attempt in America to consolidate available and new discovery devices in criminal practice... ." | 1 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Freeman
neutral
2 sentences1977Cf. Dickey v. Florida, supra, wherein the court "incorporated" or "absorbed" into the Fourteenth Amendment the "speedy trial" provision of the Sixth Amendment. [8] United States v. Jones, 173 U.S.App.D.C. 280 , 524 F.2d 834 (1975). [9] It is noted that our sister court in State v. Freeman, 276 So.2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), declined to apply the Ross rule to a 39-day factual situation, and had we such facts in the instant case, we would have likewise held. 1977Cf. Dickey v. Florida, supra, wherein the court "incorporated" or "absorbed" into the Fourteenth Amendment the "speedy trial" provision of the Sixth Amendment. [8] United States v. Jones, 173 U.S.App.D.C. 280 , 524 F.2d 834 (1975). [9] It is noted that our sister court in State v. Freeman, 276 So.2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), declined to apply the Ross rule to a 39-day factual situation, and had we such facts in the instant case, we would have likewise held. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.