The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XVII
MILITARY AFFAIRS AND RELATED MATTERS

Chapter 250
MILITARY AFFAIRS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 250.20

250.20 Armory operations; allowances.—

(1) A monetary allowance shall be paid quarterly to the post commander of each Florida National Guard armory from funds appropriated to the Department of Military Affairs, upon the approval of the Adjutant General, based on a calculation of need determined by the Adjutant General, exclusive of any space utilized and maintained by a federally funded activity of the Florida National Guard. The allowance shall cover costs for the operation, maintenance, and repair of the armory facilities. The amount of the allowance shall be computed by the Adjutant General as of June 30 of each year for purposes of determining the total amounts payable for inclusion in his or her budget request to the Legislature.

(2) Payment of all allowances authorized under this section are subject to rules prescribed by the Adjutant General, and all moneys paid are public moneys and must be accounted for as prescribed by rules. All funds must be deposited into a federal depository approved by the Department of Military Affairs.

(3) If an insufficient appropriation is made to the Department of Military Affairs to pay the allowances set forth in subsection (1), or if for other sufficient reason the amounts require redistribution among the National Guard armories, the amount to be paid to such armories shall be adjusted as administratively determined by the Adjutant General. Each post commander is responsible for the proper receipt and distribution of the post armory operations allowance, as directed by the Department of Military Affairs.

History.—s. 41, ch. 8502, 1921; s. 6, ch. 9337, 1923; s. 4, ch. 12089, 1927; CGL 2053; s. 1, ch. 13639, 1929; CGL 1936 Supp. 2053; s. 1, ch. 25112, 1949; s. 1, ch. 59-271; s. 1, ch. 77-22; s. 104, ch. 95-148; s. 18, ch. 2003-68.

Note.—Former s. 250.47.

F.S. 250.20 on Google Scholar

F.S. 250.20 on Casetext

Amendments to 250.20

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 250.20

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

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 250.20.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

A. JACKSON, v. T. CONWAY,, 763 F.3d 115 (2d Cir. 2014)

. . . Law § 250.20). . . .

ROGGIO, v. J. GRASMUCK, 18 F. Supp. 3d 49 (D. Mass. 2014)

. . . Accordingly, the photocopying costs of $250.20 will be allowed. C. . . .

UPMC BRADDOCK, v. D. HARRIS,, 934 F. Supp. 2d 238 (D.D.C. 2013)

. . . . § 60-250.20 )(2). . . .

SMITH, v. WEST,, 640 F. Supp. 2d 222 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . Law § 250.20(2), defense counsel was not ineffective in failing to object. See Collins v. . . . Law § 250.20(2). . . . .

ZIMMERMAN, v. BURGE,, 492 F. Supp. 2d 170 (E.D.N.Y. 2007)

. . . Law 250.20(1). . . .

P. HORNE, v. S. PERLMAN,, 433 F. Supp. 2d 292 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . .”) § 250.20 and thereby deprived him of the right to present witnesses in his defense. . . .

WADE, v. HERBERT,, 391 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2004)

. . . defense on the ground that his alibi notice was untimely under New York’s Criminal Procedure Law Section 250.20 . . . Law § 250.20[1]). . . . Law § 250.20[1] provides that defense counsel must serve notice of an alibi defense within eight days . . .

BENNETT, v. ARTUZ,, 285 F. Supp. 2d 305 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Law § 250.20. Petitioner’s trial counsel argued that Mr. . . .

SOUTHERLAND, v. S. GOURD, NYS, 269 F. Supp. 2d 48 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . Section 250.20(2) of New York Criminal Procedure Law states that the prosecution must “serve upon the . . . Law § 250.20(2). Williams and the guardian were not alibi rebuttal witnesses. . . .

E. PARSON, v. A. PORTUONDO,, 259 F. Supp. 2d 309 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

. . . more than eight months beyond the time limit prescribed in New York Criminal Procedure Law (“CPL”) § 250.20 . . .

BOHAN, v. KUHLMANN,, 234 F. Supp. 2d 231 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)

. . . notice of any alibi witnesses he intended to call, Rawlins had failed to do so, as required by section 250.20 . . . of the New York Criminal Procedure Law (“CPL § 250.20”). . . . See CPL § 250.20. . . . s application to exclude the alibi testimony, due to defense counsel’s failure to comply with CPL § 250.20 . . . The relevant portion, of CPL § 250.20 states: At any time, not more than twenty days after arraignment . . .

NOBLE, v. R. KELLY,, 246 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2001)

. . . 1988), the state court erred in failing to determine whether defense counsel’s non-compliance with § 250.20 . . . majority opinion sees “strong support in the record” for ascribing counsel’s non-compliance with § 250.20 . . . Section 250.20 provides that the government may serve upon the defense, up to twenty days after arraignment . . . L. § 250.20. . . . L. § 250.20 (“The court may in its discretion receive such testimony, but before doing so, it must, upon . . . Steven Yamagata should have been identified as an alibi witness in response to the prosecution’s § 250.20 . . . As a sanction for defense counsel’s failure to give notice under § 250.20, the court excluded Yamagata . . .

VASQUEZ, v. STRACK,, 228 F.3d 143 (2d Cir. 2000)

. . . Law § 250.20(2). . . . Law § 250.20. . . . Law § 250.20(1). . . . Id. § 250.20(2). . . . Id. § 250.20(4). . . .

NOBLE, v. R. KELLY,, 89 F. Supp. 2d 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)

. . . . § 250.20 (McKinney's 1993), provides that: 1. . . .

HOPSON, v. RIVERBAY CORPORATION,, 190 F.R.D. 114 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . The document was nothing more than the printed notice under New York State Criminal Procedure Law § 250.20 . . . Law § 250.20 provides that: At any time, not more than twenty days after arraignment, the people may . . .

In MURRAY, v., 239 B.R. 728 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1999)

. . . The terms of the loan provided for 179 monthly payments of $250.20 and one final balloon payment of $18,136.82 . . . In particular, both believed that, if they faithfully paid the 179 payments of $250.20, the loan would . . .

MILLIO, v. BARKLEY,, 48 F. Supp. 2d 259 (W.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . . § 250.20(1). People v. Millio, 226 A.D.2d 1071, 642 N.Y.S.2d 458 (1996). . . . N.Y.Crim.Proc.L § 250.20(1). . . . Id. § 250.20(3). . . . Id. § 250.20(5). The Supreme Court has upheld notice of alibi rules. See Williams v. . . . Besides recognizing that § 250.20 provides for notice of alibi early in the proceedings, the trial judge . . .

UNITED STATES v. RUCKER,, 32 F. Supp. 2d 545 (E.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . I do not live in the building. 240.30, 250.20. People consent to ROR in this matter. . . .

R. DEES, v. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD,, 33 F. Supp. 2d 1190 (N.D. Cal. 1998)

. . . . § 60-250.20 to § 60-250.32, 41 C.F.R. § 60-741.20 to § 60-741.32. . . .

FORD, v. PENNZOIL,, 974 F. Supp. 559 (E.D. La. 1997)

. . . See § 250.20(a). Therefore, the MMS regulations do not apply to Spider. . . . See § 250.20(e). . . .

FOX, v. MANN,, 71 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 1995)

. . . N.Y.Crim.Proe.Law § 250.20(1) (McKinney 1993). . . . Law § 250.20(2). . . . N.Y.Crim.Proc.Law § 250.20(3)-(4). The notice deadlines may be extended for good cause shown. . . . Law § 250.20(l)-(2). . . . N.Y.Crim.Proc.Law § 250.20(1). . . .

ESCALERA, v. COOMBE,, 852 F.2d 45 (2d Cir. 1988)

. . . Proc.Law § 250.20 (McKinney 1982). . . .

P. BARRON, v. NIGHTINGALE ROOFING, INC., 842 F.2d 20 (1st Cir. 1988)

. . . . § 60-250.20 et seq., contain detailed procedures for the enforcement of § 402. . . .

WALKER, v. HOOD,, 679 F. Supp. 372 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)

. . . Proc.Law § 250.20(3) (McKinney 1982). See Escalera v. . . . Proc.Law § 250.20 (McKinney 1982), provides in part: 1. . . .

ESCALERA, v. COOMBE,, 826 F.2d 185 (2d Cir. 1987)

. . . Crim.Proc.Law § 250.20 (McKinney 1982), absent a showing of substantial prejudice to the prosecution’ . . . the prosecutor before trial in accordance with New York’s alibi notice statute, N.Y.Crim.Proc.Law § 250.20 . . . Justice Corso precluded the witness based on the discretion granted to him in section 250.20(3), the . . . Proc.Law § 250.20 (alibi witness notice) with § 250.10 (insanity defense notice). . . . N.Y.Crim.Proc.Law § 250.20 (McKinney 1982). . . . .

ESCALERA, v. COOMBE,, 652 F. Supp. 1316 (E.D.N.Y. 1987)

. . . See New York Crim.Proc.Law § 250.20(1) (McKinney 1982). . . . Id. § 250.20(3). . . . brief to the appellate division alleged that the trial court had abused its discretion under section 250.20 . . . Inasmuch as section 250.20(2) of New York’s Criminal Procedure Law provides for reciprocity — i.e., disclosure . . .

MARE SCHIFFAHRTSKONTOR CO. KG, v. M V OCEANHAVEN, M V M V M V S. A. S. A., 763 F.2d 633 (4th Cir. 1985)

. . . Trees filed an answer and an amended answer confessing assets of Franco of $11,-250.20, consisting of . . .

NELSON, Jr. v. J. SMITH,, 504 F. Supp. 1139 (E.D.N.Y. 1981)

. . . See New York Criminal Procedure Law § 250.20 (requirement of prompt notice of alibi). . . .

TWITTY, v. J. SMITH,, 614 F.2d 325 (2d Cir. 1979)

. . . surprised by the alibi defense since he did not serve demand of notice of such a defense pursuant to CPL § 250.20 . . .

F. GUNN, v. Mr. KUHLMAN,, 479 F. Supp. 338 (S.D.N.Y. 1979)

. . . . § 250.20. . . .

ROSARIO, v. AMALGAMATED LADIES GARMENT CUTTERS UNION, LOCAL I. L. G. W. U. I. L. G. W. U. ROSARIO, v. AMALGAMATED LADIES GARMENT CUTTERS UNION, LOCAL I. L. G. W. U. AFL- CIO,, 605 F.2d 1228 (2d Cir. 1979)

. . . . § 250.20. These offenses are classified in New York law as “violations.” . . . .

DRAYTON, v. F. HAYES, a, 589 F.2d 117 (2d Cir. 1979)

. . . New York Criminal Procedure Law § 250.20. . . . .

JACKSON, v. FOGG,, 465 F. Supp. 177 (S.D.N.Y. 1978)

. . . . § 250.20) is unconstitutional in light of Wardius v. . . .

UNITED STATES DRAYTON, v. F. HAYES, a UNITED STATES McQUEEN, v. F. HAYES, a, 451 F. Supp. 339 (E.D.N.Y. 1978)

. . . “As required by New York Criminal Procedure Law § 250.20 (McKinney Supp.1977), defense counsel had served . . . MARKUS: Your Honor, in the event they have any additional witnesses, I am now moving under CPL Section 250.20 . . .

X. GREEN, v. FOGG,, 422 F. Supp. 1034 (S.D.N.Y. 1976)

. . . . § 250.20, requiring petitioner to disclose the substance of his alibi, and those witnesses he would . . .

DOE No. v. S. BEAL, No., 523 F.2d 611 (3d Cir. 1975)

. . . . § 250.20(a). . . .

BASS v. RICHARDSON,, 338 F. Supp. 478 (S.D.N.Y. 1971)

. . . See also 45 C.F.R. 250.20. . . . in effect a plan sufficient to meet the strict requirements of either § 1902 (a) (30) or 45 C.F.R. 250.20 . . .

P. SHULTZ, v. CANAL ZONE BUS SERVICE, INC. a a, 311 F. Supp. 978 (D.C.Z. 1970)

. . . 1555.20 Alfonso Niles 361.80 Jose Rios 1109.60 Joseph Raid 1570.70 Reginald Taylor 1561.07 Carlos Waldron 250.20 . . .

J. MCCARTHY R. v. J. CONLEY, Jr., 229 F. Supp. 517 (D. Conn. 1964)

. . . value of said stock in the estates of her father and mother, from whom she inherited them, was $361,-250.20 . . .