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 1981–2006 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Salvuccigreen1 sentence1981United States v. Salvucci, supra, 448 U.S. at 87, note 4 , 100 S.Ct. at 2550, note 4, 65 L.Ed.2d at 625, note 4. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rakas v. Illinois
green
2 sentences2006Applegate requires us to consider any theory on appeal that would sustain the trial court's decision, so long as it is consistent with the facts on which the decision was based."). [3] In Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 , 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978), the Supreme Court also discarded reliance on the separate term "standing" in determining whether a defendant is entitled to claim the protections of the exclusionary rule. 2006Applegate requires us to consider any theory on appeal that would sustain the trial court's decision, so long as it is consistent with the facts on which the decision was based."). [3] In Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 , 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978), the Supreme Court also discarded reliance on the separate term "standing" in determining whether a defendant is entitled to claim the protections of the exclusionary rule. | 4 | 1985–2006 |
Jacobs v. Alabama
green
1 sentence1988NOTES [1] Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 , 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978), reh'g denied, 439 U.S. 1122 , 99 S.Ct. 1035 , 59 L.Ed.2d 83 (1979), in which the United States Supreme Court subsumed the standing requirement under substantive fourth amendment doctrine in determining whether a defendant is entitled to claim the protections of the exclusionary rule. [2] In Jones, the Court held that defendants who are charged with crimes of possession were not required to establish a legitimate expectation of privacy in the premises searched or the property seized because they were entitled to a | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Dean v. State
green
1 sentence1985In Dean v. State, 478 So.2d 38 (Fla.1985) a case not available to the trial court at the time the ruling was made here, the Florida supreme court receded from earlier cases in which it had held that the issue of standing was to be decided separate and apart from the substantive issues, saying: In Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 [ 99 S.Ct. 421 , 58 L.Ed.2d 387 ] (1978), the United States Supreme Court discarded reliance on concepts of “standing” in determining whether a defendant is entitled to claim the protections of the exclusionary rule. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.