continuance of the sentencing hearing (Florida) · Go Syfert
← Florida issues

continuance of the sentencing hearing in Florida

5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2018 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Sparks v. Stategreen
fladistctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
1 sentence

2018Because Baugh did not object to the continuance of the sentencing hearing, we review this issue for fundamental error. § 924.051(3), Fla. Stat. (2015); Sparks v. State, 740 So. 2d 33, 35 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (“Fundamental error has been defined as error that goes to the essence of a fair and impartial trial, error so fundamentally unfair as to amount to a denial of due process.”).

11
Jones v. Stategreen
fladistctapp · 2013 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017See Jones v. State, 125 So.3d 917, 919 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (holding that a court’s denial of a motion for continuance is reviewed for an abuse of discretion).

11
Olsen v. Stategreen
fladistctapp · 1997 · cited in 1 Florida opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
1 sentence

2004Furthermore, we agree with the defendant's contention that "he was improperly sentenced as a habitual felony offender because the State failed to establish that he was the same person who was convicted of the predicate felonies used to support the sentence." Olsen v. State, 691 So.2d 17, 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

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 (1)

CaseCitedYears
Foraker v. State neutral
fladistctapp · 1999
2 sentences

2006In addition to denying the continuance, you also conducted legal research and cited to Foraker v. State, 731 So.2d 110 ([Fla.] 5th DCA 1999)[,] in support of your decision to proceed with the sentencing of Mr. Wilson notwithstanding the sleeping juror.

2006In addition to denying the continuance, you also conducted legal research and cited to Foraker v. State, 731 So.2d 110 ([Fla.] 5th DCA 1999)[,] in support of your decision to proceed with the sentencing of Mr. Wilson notwithstanding the sleeping juror.

22006–2006

Where else courts name it

CA 10 (2014–2026) OH 7 (2004–2026) FL 5 (2004–2018) WA 3 (1984–2016) NM 3 (2009–2016) NC 3 (1994–2026) UT 2 (2022–2025) AL 2 (1994–2002) PA 2 (2018–2025)

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