Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 130.20 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 130.20 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 130.20

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XI
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
Chapter 130
COUNTY BONDS
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 130.20
130.20 Time warrants in newly created counties.The board of county commissioners of any newly created county may, at any time within 6 months after the date at which the law creating the county shall become effective, issue interest-bearing time warrants in an aggregate sum not exceeding the amount of one half of 1 percent of the total tax assessed valuation of such county; provided, that where such time warrants shall come within the purview of s. 12, Art. VII of the State Constitution, the said time warrants shall be issued only after the same shall have been approved by the majority of the votes cast in an election in which a majority of the owners of freeholds not wholly exempt from taxation who are qualified electors residing in such county, shall participate, which said election shall be called and held, and the result thereof declared and recorded, in the manner prescribed by chapter 102, and said election shall be subject to all the provisions of said chapter.
History.s. 1, ch. 8518, 1921; CGL 2350; s. 1, ch. 14715, 1931; CGL 1936 Supp. 457(1); s. 15, ch. 69-216.

F.S. 130.20 on Google Scholar

F.S. 130.20 on Casetext

Amendments to 130.20


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 130.20
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 130.20.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

BREVIL, v. T. JONES,, 283 F. Supp. 3d 205 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

. . . Penal Law §§ 130.20, 130.45 ; see also Crim. Record at *2-3. . . .

UNITED STATES v. THOMPSON,, 141 F. Supp. 3d 188 (E.D.N.Y. 2015)

. . . Penal Law §§ 130.20-50 (forms of rape, sexual misconduct, and criminal sexual acts, including forced . . . similar challenge by filing a superseding indictment which cited specific statutes: New York Penal Law §§ 130.20 . . .

UNITED STATES v. GONZALEZ- MEDINA,, 757 F.3d 425 (5th Cir. 2014)

. . . Penal Law § 130.20 (defining sexual misconduct as a sexual act committed “with another person without . . .

BURHANS v. LOPEZ, 24 F. Supp. 3d 375 (S.D.N.Y. 2014)

. . . Penal Law § 130.20. . . .

NNEBE, v. DAUS,, 644 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2011)

. . . Class A _Misdemeanor_ PL 120.20 Reckless Endangerment in the 200 _Degree — Class A Misdemeanor_ PL 130.20 . . .

GANZHI, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 624 F.3d 23 (2d Cir. 2010)

. . . him removable, in that his conviction for sexual misconduct pursuant to New York Penal Law (“NYPL”) § 130.20 . . . under the categorical approach employed in reviewing statutes of conviction and, further, that section 130.20 . . . While NYPL § 130.20(1), pursuant to which Ganzhi had been convicted, contains no reference to the age . . . this statute would be considered removable, while others may not be,” the IJ concluded that section 130.20 . . . Section 130.20(1) provides that a person is guilty of sexual misconduct when “[h]e or she engages in . . .

UNITED STATES v. GUZMAN, v., 591 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 2010)

. . . Penal Law § 130.20 on May 25, 2006, and was sentenced to one year of incarceration. . . .

P. GOLLOMP, v. SPITZER,, 568 F.3d 355 (2d Cir. 2009)

. . . reconsideration and ordering attorney’s fees in the amount of $26,796.00 and costs in the amount of $130.20 . . .

UNITED STATES v. H. BOULWARE,, 558 F.3d 971 (9th Cir. 2009)

. . . Weinstein and Margaret Berger, Weinstein’s Federal Evidence, § 130.20[5], p. 103-39 (Joseph M. . . . Weinstein at § 130.20[4], p. 103-38.1. . . .

T. CUMMINGS, v. BURGE,, 581 F. Supp. 2d 436 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . . § 130.20(1)). . . .

UNITED STATES BAHRANI, v. CONAGRA, INC., 465 F.3d 1189 (10th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 130.20. The purpose of the fee is to reimburse the government for the costs incurred. . . .

FIGUEROA, v. RICKS,, 378 F. Supp. 2d 210 (W.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . ijntercourse with an underage female is, of course, criminal conduct ([New York] Penal Law §§ 130.05(2), (3), 130.20 . . .

STATE v. WHITE,, 891 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 2004)

. . . Kansas Civil Pattern Instruction 130.20 (3rd ed.) (2003). . . .

UNITED STATES BAHRANI, v. CONAGRA, INC., 338 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (D. Colo. 2004)

. . . . § 130.20. . . .

DOUGLAS, v. ASHCROFT,, 374 F.3d 230 (3d Cir. 2004)

. . . This charge was based on Douglas’ 1992 conviction under New York State Penal Law Section 130.20 for “ . . . Having determined that the Section 130.20 of the New York Penal Code is a divisible statute that covers . . . the IJ ruled that the DHS failed to establish through evidence that Douglas’ conviction under Section 130.20 . . . Dec. 991 (BIA 1999), Douglas’ conviction falls within the portion of New York Penal Law Section 130.20 . . . New York State Penal Law Section 130.20, at the time of Douglas' conviction, stated: A person is guilty . . .

UNITED STATES v. SARMIENTO- FUNES,, 374 F.3d 336 (5th Cir. 2004)

. . . Penal Law § 130.20 (McKinney 2004); Wisc.Stat.Ann. § 940.225(3) (West 1996 & Supp.2003). . . .

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. G. v. FOX, II,, 93 F. Supp. 2d 531 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . . § 130.20(j). . . .

AMERICAN WILDLANDS, v. BROWNER, U. S. U. S. VIII U. S., 94 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (D. Colo. 2000)

. . . . § 130.20). Antidegradation policies under the CWA are split into three tiers. . . .

ELF ATOCHEM NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. LaROCHE INDUSTRIES, INC., 85 F. Supp. 2d 336 (D. Del. 2000)

. . . chlorine in the absence of catalysts to form Ch2ClCCl3 (1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane, I-130A) which boils at 130.20 . . .

ELF ATOCHEM NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. LAROCHE INDUSTRIES, INC., 80 F. Supp. 2d 252 (D. Del. 2000)

. . . chlorine in the absence of catalysts to form Ch2ClCCl3 (1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane, I-130A) which boils at 130.20 . . .

UNITED STATES v. R. CARTER,, 978 F.3d 817 (2d Cir. 1992)

. . . to the effect that the cost of incarceration, supervision and electronic monitoring would total $41,-130.20 . . .

SIMMONS, v. A. L. LOCKHART,, 931 F.2d 1226 (8th Cir. 1991)

. . . Thomas—130.20 hours x $115/hour.$14,973.00 J. Druff—175.30 hours X $85/hour.$14,900.50 E. . . .

PEOPLE OF TERRITORY OF GUAM, v. ULLOA,, 903 F.2d 1283 (9th Cir. 1990)

. . . . § 130.20(a)(4), and the appellate division accepted jurisdiction pursuant to the same section. . . . Section 130.20 states in pertinent part; (a) An appeal may be taken by the government from any of the . . . because we find that in applying Guam law this appeal is not authorized by § 130.20(a)(4). . . . Because neither 8 G.C.A. § 130.20(a)(4) nor any other provision of § 130.20(a) expressly authorizes the . . . The full text of § 130.20(a) is set forth supra at p. 5302. . . . . See 8 G.C.A. 130.20(a)(4); People v. . . . judgment is not such an order, and as a result the government’s appeal is not permitted by section 130.20 . . .

PEOPLE OF TERRITORY OF GUAM, v. T. ESTREBOR,, 848 F.2d 1014 (9th Cir. 1988)

. . . Instead, Guam relies on 8 Guam Code Annotated § 130.20(a)(3). . . . There are two problems with Guam’s reliance on section 130.20. . . . If appellee is correct, the portions of section 130.20(a), including subsection (a)(3), that go beyond . . . We hold that even if section 130.20 is valid, it does not authorize the government to appeal from an . . . Therefore, we hold that, even if section 130.20 is still valid, it does not authorize the prosecutor . . .

L. J. W. Jr. R. B. E. H. K. v., 82 T.C. 941 (T.C. 1984)

. . . Benbow 1978 $542.50 $130.20 Daniel W. Cass, Jr., and Barbara L. Cass 1978 $811.00 294.00 Daniel W. . . .

PEOPLE OF THE TERRITORY OF GUAM, v. OKADA,, 694 F.2d 565 (9th Cir. 1982)

. . . Proc.Code § 130.20(a) (1977). The present case raises a different issue, however. . . . Before we can consider whether the Guam legislature intended section 130.20(a) to authorize appeals from . . . Section 130.20(a) of the Guam Criminal Procedure Code thus cannot provide the express statutory authority . . . Guam Crim.Proc.Code § 130.20(a) (1977) provides that: An appeal may be taken by the government from any . . . statute authorizing Government appeals within its Code of Criminal Procedure, see Guam Crim.Proc.Code § 130.20 . . .

PEOPLE OF TERRITORY OF GUAM, v. OKADA,, 642 F.2d 287 (9th Cir. 1981)

. . . Code § 130.20(a) (1977) purports only to authorize appeals to the District Court of Guam. . . . Section 130.20(a) thus does not provide the “express statutory authority” required for a government appeal . . . Code § 130.20(a) (1977), authorizing the government to bring appeals to the District Court in certain . . . Code § 130.20(a) (1977) provides that: An appeal may be taken by the government from any of the following . . . Code § 130.20(a) (1977) should be extended to cover appeals from the District Court of Guam, adoption . . .

PEOPLE OF TERRITORY OF GUAM, v. DISTRICT COURT OF GUAM, L. JAMES,, 641 F.2d 816 (9th Cir. 1981)

. . . Subsection (6) is added to Section 130.20(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code 'to read: ‘Subsection (6) . . .

ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND, INC. v. M. COSTLE, U. S. C. L. A. A., 439 F. Supp. 980 (E.D.N.Y. 1977)

. . . CPP §§ 130.20, 130.21. . . .

SELF, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 345 F. Supp. 191 (M.D. Fla. 1972)

. . . Nunez then said, “The fare to Corpus Christi, Texas, and back is $130.20 . . . ” Apparently anticipating . . .

V. MILLER v. ROCKEFELLER, Lt. Lt., 327 F. Supp. 542 (S.D.N.Y. 1971)

. . . plaintiffs challenge, on equal protection and federal supremacy grounds, the constitutionality of § 130.20 . . . to counsel, confrontation of witnesses, etc.) as well as their attack on the constitutionality of § 130.20 . . . On its face, § 130.20(c) of the New York Code of Military Justice, under which plaintiffs herein were . . . Similar doubts exist as to the constitutionality of § 130.20(b) of the New York Code of Military Justice . . . Even this earlier provision, however, contained no distinction, such as is found in § 130.20(b), between . . .

GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY, a v. UNITED STATES, 216 F. Supp. 181 (W.D. Mo. 1963)

. . . Sections 130.20, 130.21, and 130.22. . . . In Section 130.20, supra, the statutory history of the tax is mentioned. . . . “SEC. 130.20 Effective Period.- — The tax on the transportation of crude petroleum and liquid products . . .

REPUBLIC OIL REFINING CO. v. GRANGER,, 98 F. Supp. 921 (W.D. Pa. 1951)

. . . the Internal Revenue Act were substantially modified and now appear as Treasury Regulations 42, Secs. 130.20 . . . through 130.26, promulgated under the Internal Revenue Code: “Sec. 130.20. . . . Jones, 10 Cir., 176 F.2d 519; and now appear as Regulations 42, Sections 130.20 through 130.26. . . .

DIONYSIA E. TSERIONI AND POLYTIME ANTONOPULO, DAUGHTERS OF GEORGE D. PAPAVASILOPULO, DECEASED ANGELICA PAPAVASILOPULO, WIDOW OF JOHN D. PAPAVASILOPULO, AND DIONYSIUS PAPAVASILOPULO AND EUSTADIO PAPAVASILOPULO, SONS OF SAID JOHN D. PAPAVASILOPULO AND DIONYSIUS N. TAMVAKIS, A SON OF ATHENA TAMVAKIS v. THE UNITED STATES, 94 Ct. Cl. 142 (Ct. Cl. 1941)

. . . -5-10 418.50 128859... 5-24-06 4-27-10 338.25 285922. 11-20-06 4-5-10 474.75 70863— 3-24-09 5-10-10 130.20 . . .

WESTERN RY. OF ALABAMA v. RAILROAD COMMISSION OF ALABAMA CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RY. CO. v. SAME, 197 F. 954 (M.D. Ala. 1912)

. . . Alabama operates a railroad from West Point, Ga., through Montgomery, Ala., to Selma, Ala., a distance of 130.20 . . .