5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Zack v. Stategreen2 sentences2020After the initial objection, “the issue is not preserved for appellate review if the party objecting to the challenge fails to renew the objection before the jury is sworn.” Zack v. State, 911 So. 2d 1190, 1204 (Fla. 2005) (citing Franqui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1332, 1334 (Fla. 1997); Joiner v. State, 618 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 1993)). 2007Id. at 176 ; see also Zack v. State, 911 So.2d at 1204 (reaffirming Joiner and holding that a Neil issue "is not preserved for *319 appellate review if the party objecting to the challenge fails to renew the objection before the jury is sworn"). [3] In other words, renewing an objection before the jury is sworn gives the trial court one last chance to correct a potential error and avoid a possible reversal on appeal. | 2 | 3 |
Franqui v. Stategreen2 sentences2020After the initial objection, “the issue is not preserved for appellate review if the party objecting to the challenge fails to renew the objection before the jury is sworn.” Zack v. State, 911 So. 2d 1190, 1204 (Fla. 2005) (citing Franqui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1332, 1334 (Fla. 1997); Joiner v. State, 618 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 1993)). 2005See Franqui v. State, 699 So.2d 1332, 1334 (Fla.1997); Joiner v. State, 618 So.2d 174 (Fla.1993). | 2 | 2 |
Joiner v. Stategreen2 sentences2020After the initial objection, “the issue is not preserved for appellate review if the party objecting to the challenge fails to renew the objection before the jury is sworn.” Zack v. State, 911 So. 2d 1190, 1204 (Fla. 2005) (citing Franqui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1332, 1334 (Fla. 1997); Joiner v. State, 618 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 1993)). 2007Id. at 176 ; see also Zack v. State, 911 So.2d at 1204 (reaffirming Joiner and holding that a Neil issue "is not preserved for *319 appellate review if the party objecting to the challenge fails to renew the objection before the jury is sworn"). [3] In other words, renewing an objection before the jury is sworn gives the trial court one last chance to correct a potential error and avoid a possible reversal on appeal. | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences2005For a lawyer's assistance to be "so defective as to require reversal of a conviction," Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , requires proof of two elements: First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. *1260 This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the "counsel" guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. 2005For a lawyer's assistance to be "so defective as to require reversal of a conviction," Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , requires proof of two elements: First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. *1260 This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the "counsel" guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Melbourne v. State
green
1 sentence1997Id. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
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.