Hall v. State, 568 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). · Go Syfert
Search
Hall v. State, 568 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
7 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Kraig Alexander Williams v. State of Florida (fladistctapp, 2018-08-16)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kraig Alexander Williams v. State of Florida (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
“In order to satisfy the appearance of justice, a sworn jury should not include as its foreman, the step father of an officer who testified in the case.” Id. at 1347 (emphasis added).
discussed Cited "see" Johnson v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See Hall v. State, 568 So.2d 1346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Curry v. State, 568 So.2d 1346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Mickens v. State, 568 So.2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Cobb v. State, 567 So.2d 554 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Huff v. State, 566 So.2d 945 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Schesny v. State, 564 So.2d 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Buckley v. State, 558 So.2d 534 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Betsey v. State, 558 So.2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Glass v. State, 556 So.2d 465 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). [3] This concept and language was lifted from section 948.06(1) which originally related to the court's authority to impose a sente…
cited Cited "see, e.g." Denmark v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Polynice v. State, 568 So.2d 1346 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
David Lee HALL
v.
STATE of Florida
No. 90-1747.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Nov 6, 1990.
568 So. 2d 1346
David Davis, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant., Jim Rogers, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
Nimmons, Shivers, Smith.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Cobb v. State, 567 So.2d 554 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Huff v. State, 566 So.2d 945 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Fla.R.App.P. 9.315(a). We certify the following question to the supreme court as one of great public importance:

DOES A JEOPARDY VIOLATION RESULT FROM THE IMPOSITION OF A PROBATIONARY SPLIT SENTENCE WHEN THE LEGISLATURE HAS NOT EXPLICITLY AUTHORIZED THAT DISPOSITION IN THE SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES FOR § 921.087, FLA. STAT.?
SHIVERS, C.J., and SMITH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.