Lamont Taylor v. State, 143 So. 3d 974 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). · Go Syfert
Search
Lamont Taylor v. State, 143 So. 3d 974 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
29 citation events (29 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: JEFFREY M. HASTINGS v. STATE OF FLORIDA (fladistctapp, 2024-05-29)
Treatment trajectory · 2016 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2016 2021 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
examined Cited as authority (rule) JEFFREY M. HASTINGS v. STATE OF FLORIDA (3×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
In so doing, we stress that even when the burden of production shifts to the strike proponent during step 2, the burden of persuasion “never leaves the opponent of the strike to prove purposeful racial discrimination.” See Landis v. State, 143 So. 3d 974, 977 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (quoting Melbourne, 679 So. 2d at 764 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) LEANTHONY SMITH v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
Melbourne, 679 So. 2d at 764 ; Landis v. State, 143 So. 3d 974, 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014).
cited Cited as authority (rule) JOHN PACCHIANA v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
Landis v. State, 143 So. 3d 974, 979 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Spencer v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Daniel v. State, 697 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (when the defense objected to the State’s reasons for its peremptory challenges as racially motivated, the trial court concluded that the State’s reasons were “race neutral”); Landis v. State, 143 So.3d 974, 976-77 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (the trial court made a finding that the State’s reason for its peremptory was “genuine,” which' actually appears to have been a finding that the reason was facially race neutral); Cook v. State, 104 So.3d 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (the trial court and the parties all appear to have in…
cited Cited "see" HIALEAH HOSPITAL, INC. v. JOSHUA MISIUS HAYES-BOURSIQUOT, etc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landis v. State, 143 So. 3d 974, 979 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); see also James v. State, 768 So. 2d 1221, 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).
discussed Cited "see" GEOVANI JOHNSON v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landis v. State, 143 So. 3d 974, 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“If the record lacks any indication that the trial court considered the totality of the circumstances relevant to whether a strike was exercised for a discriminatory purpose, the reviewing court, which is confined to the cold record before it, cannot assume that a 18 genuineness inquiry was actually conducted and give deference to the trial court.”).
discussed Cited "see" GEOVANI JOHNSON v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landis v. State, 143 So. 3d 974, 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“If the record lacks any indication that the trial court considered the totality of the circumstances relevant to whether a strike was exercised for a discriminatory purpose, the reviewing court, which is confined to the cold record before it, cannot assume that a genuineness inquiry was actually conducted and give deference to the trial court.”).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." TIMOTHY HUNTER v. STATE OF FLORIDA
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See Nowell v. State, 998 So.2d 597, 605 (Fla. 2008) (trial court erred in accepting the State’s “age-based justification” for a peremptory strike of a Hispanic juror as genuine, because the state’s proffered reason was also “clearly applicable” to a “similarly aged white male whom the state failed to challenge”); Stroia v. State, 119 So.3d 1274, 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (trial court erred in finding that the state’s reason for striking an African American juror—that family members had been arrested for drug charges—was genuine where the state accepted two similarly situat…
Lamont TAYLOR, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee
5D11-4179.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Jul 7, 2014.
143 So. 3d 974
Lamont Taylor, Indiantown, pro se., Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Bonnie Jean Parrish, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Orfinger, Lawson, Wallis.
Published

ON REMAND FROM THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT

PER CURIAM.

This case was remanded from the Florida Supreme Court, which quashed our prior opinion dismissing (for lack of jurisdiction) Lamont Taylor’s appeal from the denial of his rule 3.850 postconviction motion. The trial court denied Taylor’s claims after an evidentiary hearing and Taylor has not raised an issue warranting reversal or discussion.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, LAWSON and WALLIS, JJ., concur.