context of a sentencing error (Florida) · Go Syfert
← Florida issues

context of a sentencing error in Florida

5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2019 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 (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Zack v. Stategreen
fla · 2000 · cited in 3 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2016–2017
2 sentences

2017Therefore, “[i]n the context of a sentencing error, the relevant question is whether ‘there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the sentence.’” Johnson v. State, 205 So.3d 1285, 1290 (Fla. 2016) (quoting Zack v. State, 753 So.2d 9, 20 (Fla. 2000)).

2017Therefore, “[i]n the context of a sentencing error, the relevant question is whether ‘there is [a] reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the sentence.’ ” Johnson v. State, 205 So.3d 1285, 1290 (Fla. 2016) (quoting Zack v. State, 753 So.2d 9, 20 (Fla. 2000)), cert. denied, No. 16-1252, — U.S. -, — S.Ct. -, — L.Ed.2d-(2017).

33
Paul Beasley Johnson v. State of Floridagreen
fla · 2016 · cited in 2 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017Therefore, “[i]n the context of a sentencing error, the relevant question is whether ‘there is a reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the sentence.’” Johnson v. State, 205 So.3d 1285, 1290 (Fla. 2016) (quoting Zack v. State, 753 So.2d 9, 20 (Fla. 2000)).

2017Therefore, “[i]n the context of a sentencing error, the relevant question is whether ‘there is [a] reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the sentence.’ ” Johnson v. State, 205 So.3d 1285, 1290 (Fla. 2016) (quoting Zack v. State, 753 So.2d 9, 20 (Fla. 2000)), cert. denied, No. 16-1252, — U.S. -, — S.Ct. -, — L.Ed.2d-(2017).

22
State v. Andersongreen
fla · 2005 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007See State v. Anderson, 905 So.2d 111, 115-16 (Fla.2005); see also Williams v. State, 720 So.2d 590, 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

11
Williams v. Stategreen
fladistctapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007See State v. Anderson, 905 So.2d 111, 115-16 (Fla.2005); see also Williams v. State, 720 So.2d 590, 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

11
State v. DiGuiliogreen
fla · 1986 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007Unlike the majority, I would reach the merits of Harris's claim. [7] With all due respect to the majority, its conclusion that the error asserted by Harris is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt is unsupportable. *798 "The harmless error test," as explained by the supreme court in State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129, 1135 (Fla.1986), when applied to a jury's verdict convicting a defendant, "places the burden on the state, as the beneficiary of the error, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict or, alternatively stated, that there is no rea

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 (2)

CaseCitedYears
Guichard Jean-Baptiste v. State green
fladistctapp · 2015
1 sentence

2019Because the defendant offered his allocution “in the context of a sentencing hearing which included the introduction of evidence in support of [his] motion for downward departure, the trial court did not err in requiring [him] to be sworn and subject to cross-examination.” Id. at 1242 .

12019–2019
Gary Czajkowski v. State of Florida red
fla · 2016
1 sentence

2016Hurst v. State, 202 So.3d at 68 .

12016–2016

Statutes the citing opinions construe

FL § 775.082 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

IL 14 (1991–2026) IN 6 (2003–2005) FL 5 (2007–2019) DE 3 (2016–2025) KS 3 (2014–2018) WA 2 (2002–2002) MD 2 (2002–2020) TN 2 (2007–2025)

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