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.
5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jackson v. Stategreen2 sentences2011See Jackson v. State, 575 So.2d 181, 188 (Fla.1991); Lawyer v. State, 627 So.2d 564, 567 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). 2005Jackson, 575 So.2d at 188 . | 1 | 3 |
Conner v. Stategreen1 sentence2011Unless the circumstances fall within this 'narrow exception,' these matters are not the subject of fair comment, and any comment ‘fairly susceptible’ to being construed as a comment on the failure to mount a defense is impermissible.”) (internal citations omitted); see also Conner v. State, 910 So.2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (improper for prosecutor, during rebuttal closing argument, to comment on defendant’s failure to call two witnesses, where based on defendant’s version of events, it was unlikely that had those witnesses been called, defendant would have asserted defense of alibi, self-defe | 1 | 1 |
Lawyer v. Stategreen1 sentence2011See Jackson v. State, 575 So.2d 181, 188 (Fla.1991); Lawyer v. State, 627 So.2d 564, 567 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). | 1 | 1 |
Goodwin v. Stategreen1 sentence2006See id. | 1 | 1 |
Rodriguez v. Stategreen1 sentence2005In Rodriguez v. State, 753 So.2d 29, 38-39 (Fla.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 859 , 121 S.Ct. 145 , 148 L.Ed.2d 96 (2000), the court explained: There is a "narrow exception" to this rule, applicable where the defendant has asserted a defense of alibi, self-defense, or defense of others, relying on facts that could be elicited only from a witness who is not equally available to the State. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Antonio Rodriguez v. Florida
green
1 sentence2005In Rodriguez v. State, 753 So.2d 29, 38-39 (Fla.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 859 , 121 S.Ct. 145 , 148 L.Ed.2d 96 (2000), the court explained: There is a "narrow exception" to this rule, applicable where the defendant has asserted a defense of alibi, self-defense, or defense of others, relying on facts that could be elicited only from a witness who is not equally available to the State. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Salazar-Robles v. United States
green
1 sentence2005In Rodriguez v. State, 753 So.2d 29, 38-39 (Fla.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 859 , 121 S.Ct. 145 , 148 L.Ed.2d 96 (2000), the court explained: There is a "narrow exception" to this rule, applicable where the defendant has asserted a defense of alibi, self-defense, or defense of others, relying on facts that could be elicited only from a witness who is not equally available to the State. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Pitts v. Gearinger
green
1 sentence2005In Rodriguez v. State, 753 So.2d 29, 38-39 (Fla.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 859 , 121 S.Ct. 145 , 148 L.Ed.2d 96 (2000), the court explained: There is a "narrow exception" to this rule, applicable where the defendant has asserted a defense of alibi, self-defense, or defense of others, relying on facts that could be elicited only from a witness who is not equally available to the State. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
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.