5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1953–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Coco v. State
green
2 sentences2012Additionally, this Court has provided “that it is ‘fatal error for the trial court to deny defense counsel the right of cross-examination for the purpose of laying a predicate for impeachment.’ ” Id. at 326 (quoting Coco, 62 So.2d at 896 ). 2007We have long held that it is "fatal error for the trial court to deny defense counsel the right of cross-examination for the purpose of laying a predicate for impeachment." See Coco, 62 So.2d at 896 . | 2 | 2007–2012 |
Larkins v. State
green
1 sentence2016Affirmed. § 924.33, Fla. Stat. (2015); Larkins v. State, 655 So.2d 95 (Fla.1995) (holding although it was error for the trial court to deny defense opportunity to inquire about a State witness’s pending charges, such error was harmless in light of the other evidence against the defendant and the fact that there was no reasonable possibility that the error affected the verdict.) | 1 | 2016–2016 |
McDuffie v. State
green
1 sentence2012Additionally, this Court has provided “that it is ‘fatal error for the trial court to deny defense counsel the right of cross-examination for the purpose of laying a predicate for impeachment.’ ” Id. at 326 (quoting Coco, 62 So.2d at 896 ). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Wilson v. State
green
1 sentence2001Wilson, 783 So.2d at 1105 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Hahn v. State
green
1 sentence1953In the recent case of Hahn v. State, Fla., 58 So.2d 188 , we had the almost identical question before us and without equivocation we held that it was fatal error for the trial court to deny defense counsel the right of cross-examination for the purpose of laying a predicate for impeachment. | 1 | 1953–1953 |
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.