Florida Statute 38.07 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title V
JUDICIAL BRANCH

Chapter 38
JUDGES: GENERAL PROVISIONS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 38.07

38.07 Effect of orders entered prior to disqualification; petition for reconsideration.—When orders have been entered in any cause by a judge prior to the entry of any order of disqualification under s. 38.02 or s. 38.05, any party to the cause may, within 30 days after the filing in the cause of the order of the chief judge of the circuit or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, as provided for in s. 38.09, petition the judge so designated for a reconsideration of the orders entered by the disqualified judge prior to the date of the entry of the order of disqualification. Such a petition shall set forth with particularity the matters of law or fact to be relied upon as grounds for the modification or vacation of the orders. Such a petition shall be granted as a matter of right. Upon the granting of the petition, notice of the time and place of the hearing thereon, together with a copy of the petition, shall be mailed by the attorney, or attorneys, of record for the petitioners to the other attorney or attorneys of record, or to the party or parties if they have no attorneys of record. This notice shall be mailed at least 8 days prior to the date fixed by the judge for the hearing. The judge before whom the cause is then pending may, after the hearing, affirm, approve, confirm, reenter, modify, or vacate the orders.

History.—s. 8, ch. 16053, 1933; CGL 1936 Supp. 4155(7); s. 10, ch. 63-572; s. 30, ch. 81-259; s. 1, ch. 83-260.

F.S. 38.07 on Google Scholar

F.S. 38.07 on Casetext

Amendments to 38.07

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 38.07

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 38.07.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 38.07

Total Results: 20

Mansfield v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2017-09-15

Citation: 227 So. 3d 704, 2017 WL 4077875

Snippet: offer Mansfield a plea. The court offered Mansfield 38.7 months which was the lowest permissible sentence

In re Senate Joint Resolution of Legislative Apportionment 2-B

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2012-04-27

Citation: 89 So. 3d 872, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 319, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 834, 2012 WL 1476065

Snippet: not have controlled the Democratic primary (only 38.7% of the Democrats voting in the 2010 primary would

Correa v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2010-06-23

Citation: 43 So. 3d 738, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 9124, 2010 WL 2507317

Snippet: see Gable, 2009 U. Ill. J.L. Tech. & Pol'y at 337-38. [7] The parties refer to the device as an "MTD."

Rath v. Network Marketing, L.C.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2006-12-06

Citation: 944 So. 2d 485, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 20345, 2006 WL 3498427

Snippet: recused judge as a matter of right, citing to section 38.07, Florida Statutes. However, that statute applies

Brinkley v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2005-04-06

Citation: 898 So. 2d 1175, 2005 WL 762622

Snippet: indication that he was denying the motions. Section 38.07, Florida Statutes (2001), provides: When orders

Rudolf v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2003-08-08

Citation: 851 So. 2d 839, 2003 WL 21820501

Snippet: rejected the offer and stated that Rudolf only scored 38.7 points and that he would plead out to time served

Way v. State

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 2000-04-20

Citation: 760 So. 2d 903, 2000 WL 422869

Snippet: activity; (2) Way's age at the time of the crime38. [7] (1) Way's childhood-his father died when Way

State v. Marks

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2000-03-29

Citation: 758 So. 2d 1131, 2000 WL 313507

Snippet: of Jud. Conduct, Canon 3 B(7) (1995). [5] See § 38.07 Fla. Stat. (1999) (upon assignment of successor

Wright v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1999-08-10

Citation: 739 So. 2d 1230, 1999 WL 594179

Snippet: have significantly reduced the sentencing range to 38.7 to 64.5 months. Expressly relying solely on physical

Moransais v. Heathman

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1999-07-01

Citation: 744 So. 2d 973, 1999 WL 462629

Snippet: Commercial Torts, Fla. B.J. 34 Nov. 1995 at 34, 36-38. [7] In so holding, we recognized that our conclusion

Schlesinger v. Chemical Bank

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1998-03-04

Citation: 707 So. 2d 868, 1998 WL 88339

Snippet: voidable not void. Appellant's reliance on section 38.07, Florida Statutes (1995) is misplaced because that

Tyler v. State, Governor Chiles

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1997-11-19

Citation: 718 So. 2d 811, 1997 WL 719319

Snippet: judicial orders entered by Judge Durrance. See § 38.07, Fla. Stat. (1995); Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.160(h)

Gregory v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1995-12-27

Citation: 666 So. 2d 222, 1995 WL 759128

Snippet: points, appellant's sentencing guidelines range is 38.7 to 64.5 months as opposed to 58.2 to 92 months.

Barber v. MacKenzie

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1990-05-15

Citation: 562 So. 2d 755, 1990 WL 62853

Snippet: citing as authority section 38.07, Florida Statutes (1989).[1] While section 38.07 does provide for such a

Ago

Court: Florida Attorney General Reports | Date Filed: 1978-12-29

Snippet: counties may be joined in a single agency. Section 252.38(7), F. S.) This conclusion may be reinforced, and

Neely v. Bruten

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1976-11-15

Citation: 339 So. 2d 1126, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 16016

Snippet: Judge Blount, newly assigned to both the estate, § 38.07, F.S., and to the Neelys’ newly-filed independent

Dade County v. Pepper

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1964-10-27

Citation: 168 So. 2d 198

Snippet: City of Los Angeles, [33 Cal.2d 453] 202 Pac.2d 38 [7 A.L.R.2d 990] (California 1949); City of Miami Beach

Shelby Mutual Ins. Co. v. Ferber Sheet Metal Works, Inc.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1963-10-08

Citation: 156 So. 2d 748

Snippet: United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 297 Mass. 34, 38, 7 N.E.2d 426; Sheehan v. Goriansky, 321 Mass. 200

Linton v. Walker

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1858-07-01

Citation: 8 Fla. 144

Snippet: child is no payment.” — 1 John. Chy. 3; 7 Cowen, 38; 7 Wend. 354 ; 15 Wend. 631; 2 Mass. 55 ; 3 Pick. 213;

Croom v. Swann

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1847-01-15

Citation: 1 Fla. 211

Snippet: even for a deceitful warranty.” 1 Chitty on PI. 38, 7 Am. Ed, And- where a person undertakes to do an