Freeland v. State, 832 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). · Go Syfert
Search
Freeland v. State, 832 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the gravamen of the offense is the failure to appear at the scheduled place and time, not the number of offenses pending and scheduled for that particular occasion”
7 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Hawkins v. State (fladistctapp, 2014-05-23)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Hawkins v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the gravamen of the offense is the failure to appear at the scheduled place and time, not the number of offenses pending and scheduled for that particular occasion
cited Cited "see" Givens v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Freeland v. State, 832 So.2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Simmons v. State, 753 So.2d 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Boyer v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Gonzalez v. State, 808 So.2d 1265 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (quoting Fletcher v. State, 699 So.2d 346, 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)); Walker v. State, 718 So.2d 217, 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); see also Freeland v. State, 832 So.2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (holding that the registration and reporting requirements of the Sexual Predator Act are "regulatory and procedural in nature and do not violate the ex post facto clause.").
Matthew J. FREELAND, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
1D02-1075.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Dec 19, 2002.
832 So. 2d 923
Per Curiam.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

Fred M. Johnson, Fuller, Johnson, and Farrell, PA., Tallahassee for Appellant.

Richard E. Doran, Attorney General; Alan R. Dakan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The registration and reporting requirements of Section 943.0435, Florida Statutes (2000) are regulatory and procedural in nature and do not violate the ex post facto clause. See Simmons v. State, 753 So.2d 762 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding that section 943.0435, Florida Statutes, does not violate ex post facto clause as it neither alters the definition of criminal conduct nor constitutes punishment). See also Westerheide v. State, 831 So.2d 93, 102-04 (Fla.2002) (holding that the Jimmy Ryce Act is not punitive in nature and does not violate ex post facto clause); Gonzalez v. State, 808 So.2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that the reporting requirements as well as the notification requirements of Florida's Sexual Predator Act are regulatory and procedural in nature and do not violate the ex post facto clause); Rickman v. State, 714 So.2d 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (holding that registration requirement of Florida's Sexual Predator Act is procedural and regulatory in nature and does not constitute punishment in violation of ex post facto clause).

AFFIRMED.

BARFIELD, MINER and POLSTON, JJ., concur.