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 1964–2011 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Francois v. Kleingreen2 sentences2003See generally Francois v. Klein, 431 So.2d 165 (Fla.1983)(explaining that a rule 3.850 motion could be considered by the trial court while a petition for writ of habeas corpus as to the same case was pending in the appellate court); Keel v. State, 740 So.2d 4 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)(holding that a court can rule on a rule 3.850 motion when an appeal is pending from the denial of an unrelated rule 3.800(a) motion); Clark v. State, 720 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)(holding trial court could consider merits of rule 3.850 motion, raising ineffective assistance of counsel claims, while appeal of sexual 2003See generally Francois v. Klein, 431 So.2d 165 (Fla.1983) (explaining that a rule 3.850 motion could be considered by the trial court while a petition for writ of habeas corpus as to the same case was pending in the appellate court); Jones v. State, 787 So.2d 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (ruling that the trial court should not have dismissed a rule 3.850 motion while a prior unrelated postconviction motion was on appeal); Norman v. State, 739 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding that a court can rule on a 3.850 motion when an appeal is pending from an unrelated rule 3.800(a) motion). | 2 | 2 |
Newberry v. Stategreen1 sentence2006See Newberry v. State, 827 So.2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Norman v. State, 739 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). | 1 | 1 |
Longo v. Stategreen2 sentences1964See also Longo v. State, 157 Fla. 668 , 26 So.2d 818 . 1964See also Longo v. State, 157 Fla. 668 , 26 So.2d 818 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Norman v. State
green
2 sentences2006See Newberry v. State, 827 So.2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Norman v. State, 739 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). 2003See generally Francois v. Klein, 431 So.2d 165 (Fla.1983) (explaining that a rule 3.850 motion could be considered by the trial court while a petition for writ of habeas corpus as to the same case was pending in the appellate court); Jones v. State, 787 So.2d 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (ruling that the trial court should not have dismissed a rule 3.850 motion while a prior unrelated postconviction motion was on appeal); Norman v. State, 739 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding that a court can rule on a 3.850 motion when an appeal is pending from an unrelated rule 3.800(a) motion). | 2 | 2003–2006 |
Hitchcock v. State
green
1 sentence2011Id. at 863 , 860 n. 1. *177 As the Court had already determined that Hitchcock was entitled to resentencing based on an unrelated claim, the Court did not need to address either of these arguments. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Jones v. State
green
1 sentence2003See generally Francois v. Klein, 431 So.2d 165 (Fla.1983) (explaining that a rule 3.850 motion could be considered by the trial court while a petition for writ of habeas corpus as to the same case was pending in the appellate court); Jones v. State, 787 So.2d 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (ruling that the trial court should not have dismissed a rule 3.850 motion while a prior unrelated postconviction motion was on appeal); Norman v. State, 739 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding that a court can rule on a 3.850 motion when an appeal is pending from an unrelated rule 3.800(a) motion). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Keel v. State
green
1 sentence2003See generally Francois v. Klein, 431 So.2d 165 (Fla.1983)(explaining that a rule 3.850 motion could be considered by the trial court while a petition for writ of habeas corpus as to the same case was pending in the appellate court); Keel v. State, 740 So.2d 4 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)(holding that a court can rule on a rule 3.850 motion when an appeal is pending from the denial of an unrelated rule 3.800(a) motion); Clark v. State, 720 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)(holding trial court could consider merits of rule 3.850 motion, raising ineffective assistance of counsel claims, while appeal of sexual | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Clark v. State
green
1 sentence2003See generally Francois v. Klein, 431 So.2d 165 (Fla.1983)(explaining that a rule 3.850 motion could be considered by the trial court while a petition for writ of habeas corpus as to the same case was pending in the appellate court); Keel v. State, 740 So.2d 4 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)(holding that a court can rule on a rule 3.850 motion when an appeal is pending from the denial of an unrelated rule 3.800(a) motion); Clark v. State, 720 So.2d 1097 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)(holding trial court could consider merits of rule 3.850 motion, raising ineffective assistance of counsel claims, while appeal of sexual | 1 | 2003–2003 |
McDonalds Corp. v. Doty
neutral
1 sentence1984Cf. McDonalds Corp. v. Doty, 431 So.2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Brown v. State
green
1 sentence1964However, my view is not to be construed as one that once an officer intercepts a motorist to inspect his driver’s license or for any other lawful reason he may not conduct a search if there comes to his plain view evidence indicating that the operator is then engaged in an unrelated violation of law such as was the case in State v. Simmons, Fla., 85 So.2d 879 , Brown v. State, Fla., 91 So.2d 175 , and Self v. State, Fla., 98 So.2d 333 . | 1 | 1964–1964 |
Self v. State
green
1 sentence1964However, my view is not to be construed as one that once an officer intercepts a motorist to inspect his driver’s license or for any other lawful reason he may not conduct a search if there comes to his plain view evidence indicating that the operator is then engaged in an unrelated violation of law such as was the case in State v. Simmons, Fla., 85 So.2d 879 , Brown v. State, Fla., 91 So.2d 175 , and Self v. State, Fla., 98 So.2d 333 . | 1 | 1964–1964 |
State v. Simmons
neutral
1 sentence1964However, my view is not to be construed as one that once an officer intercepts a motorist to inspect his driver’s license or for any other lawful reason he may not conduct a search if there comes to his plain view evidence indicating that the operator is then engaged in an unrelated violation of law such as was the case in State v. Simmons, Fla., 85 So.2d 879 , Brown v. State, Fla., 91 So.2d 175 , and Self v. State, Fla., 98 So.2d 333 . | 1 | 1964–1964 |
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.