Notes of Decisions
Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016).
· cites it 76× “(quoting § 775.082(1), Fla. Stat. (2012)). The Supreme Court analyzed Florida’s scheme as one in which a jury renders only an - 17 - advisory verdict without specifying the factual basis of its recommendation, while the judge evaluates the evidence of aggravation and mitigation…”
Kenneth R. Jackson v. State of Florida, 213 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 2017).
· cites it 30× “Further, I would not reanalyze the scope of or proper remedy for Hurst errors, which the majority discusses on pages 67-73, because we already addressed these issues, including the inapplicability of section 775.082, Florida Statutes, in Hurst, 202 So.”
Mendenhall v. State, 48 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 2010).
· cites it 76× “See § 775.082, Fla. Stat. (2000). In other words, the PRR statute covers sentencing for all crimes, including those involving the use of a firearm.”
State of Florida v. Dazarian Cordell Lewars, 259 So. 3d 793 (Fla. 2018).
· cites it 24× “082 confirms the plain meaning of the specific provision at issue, showing that release from a particular type of facility, namely a prison or its equivalent-and not a county jail-is a necessary component of the PRR definition. The PRR statute's focus on the facility where a…”
Reed v. State, 192 So. 3d 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016).
· cites it 34× “See- § 775.082(10) Fla. Stat. (2011). After careful review and the benefit of oral argument, we hold that the circuit court’s findings were inadequate to sentence Reed to a state prison sanction.”
Jones v. State, 71 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
· cites it 36× “" § 775.082(10), Fla. Stat. The statute does define "nonstate prison sanction," but the phrase is commonly understood to mean probation, community control, or imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year.”
State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000).
· cites it 19× “§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (1997)(emphasis supplied).”
Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2002).
· cites it 13× “§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (2001). [31] See § 921.”
— 775.082(1) — 271 cases
Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016).
“(quoting § 775.082(1), Fla. Stat. (2012)). The Supreme Court analyzed Florida’s scheme as one in which a jury renders only an - 17 - advisory verdict without specifying the factual basis of its recommendation, while the judge evaluates the evidence of aggravation and mitigation…”
Bottoson v. Moore, 833 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2002).
“§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (2001). [31] See § 921.”
— 775.082(1)(a) — 18 cases
— 775.082(1)(b) — 39 cases
— 775.082(1)(b)(1) — 7 cases
— 775.082(1)(b)(2) — 4 cases
— 775.082(1)(b)(3) — 2 cases
— 775.082(1)(d) — 2 cases
— 775.082(10) — 89 cases
Reed v. State, 192 So. 3d 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016).
“See- § 775.082(10) Fla. Stat. (2011). After careful review and the benefit of oral argument, we hold that the circuit court’s findings were inadequate to sentence Reed to a state prison sanction.”
Jones v. State, 71 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
“" § 775.082(10), Fla. Stat. The statute does define "nonstate prison sanction," but the phrase is commonly understood to mean probation, community control, or imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year.”
— 775.082(2) — 53 cases
Timothy Lee Hurst v. State of Florida, 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016).
“(quoting § 775.082(1), Fla. Stat. (2012)). The Supreme Court analyzed Florida’s scheme as one in which a jury renders only an - 17 - advisory verdict without specifying the factual basis of its recommendation, while the judge evaluates the evidence of aggravation and mitigation…”
Kenneth R. Jackson v. State of Florida, 213 So. 3d 754 (Fla. 2017).
“Further, I would not reanalyze the scope of or proper remedy for Hurst errors, which the majority discusses on pages 67-73, because we already addressed these issues, including the inapplicability of section 775.082, Florida Statutes, in Hurst, 202 So.”
— 775.082(2)(a) — 2 cases
— 775.082(2)(b) — 1 case
— 775.082(2)(c) — 3 cases
Mendenhall v. State, 48 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 2010).
“See § 775.082, Fla. Stat. (2000). In other words, the PRR statute covers sentencing for all crimes, including those involving the use of a firearm.”
— 775.082(2)(d) — 2 cases
— 775.082(3) — 33 cases
— 775.082(3)(a) — 142 cases
— 775.082(3)(a)(1) — 2 cases
— 775.082(3)(a)(2) — 2 cases
— 775.082(3)(a)(3) — 14 cases
Mendenhall v. State, 48 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 2010).
“See § 775.082, Fla. Stat. (2000). In other words, the PRR statute covers sentencing for all crimes, including those involving the use of a firearm.”
— 775.082(3)(a)(3)(b) — 1 case
— 775.082(3)(a)(4) — 3 cases
— 775.082(3)(a)(4)(a) — 4 cases
— 775.082(3)(a)(4)(b) — 1 case
— 775.082(3)(a)(5) — 1 case
— 775.082(3)(a)(5)(c) — 2 cases
— 775.082(3)(b) — 172 cases
Mendenhall v. State, 48 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 2010).
“See § 775.082, Fla. Stat. (2000). In other words, the PRR statute covers sentencing for all crimes, including those involving the use of a firearm.”
— 775.082(3)(b)(1) — 6 cases
— 775.082(3)(b)(1985) — 1 case
— 775.082(3)(b)(2)(b) — 2 cases
— 775.082(3)(b)(l) — 1 case
— 775.082(3)(c) — 276 cases
— 775.082(3)(d) — 326 cases
— 775.082(3)(e) — 41 cases
— 775.082(3Xe) — 1 case
— 775.082(4) — 9 cases
— 775.082(4)(a) — 107 cases
— 775.082(4)(b) — 61 cases
— 775.082(4)(c) — 2 cases
— 775.082(4)(d) — 5 cases
— 775.082(5) — 2 cases
— 775.082(7) — 1 case
— 775.082(8) — 147 cases
State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000).
“§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (1997)(emphasis supplied).”
— 775.082(8)(1)(q) — 1 case
— 775.082(8)(B) — 1 case
— 775.082(8)(a) — 68 cases
— 775.082(8)(a)(1) — 9 cases
— 775.082(8)(a)(1)(o) — 2 cases
— 775.082(8)(a)(1)(q) — 6 cases
— 775.082(8)(a)(2) — 5 cases
— 775.082(8)(a)(2)(a) — 3 cases
— 775.082(8)(a)(2)(b) — 2 cases
— 775.082(8)(a)(l) — 1 case
— 775.082(8)(a)(l)(o) — 1 case
— 775.082(8)(a)(l)(p) — 1 case
— 775.082(8)(b) — 8 cases
— 775.082(8)(c) — 30 cases
State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000).
“§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (1997)(emphasis supplied).”
— 775.082(8)(d) — 22 cases
State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000).
“§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (1997)(emphasis supplied).”
— 775.082(8)(d)(1) — 2 cases
— 775.082(8)(d)(1)(d) — 1 case
— 775.082(8)(e) — 3 cases
— 775.082(9) — 128 cases
— 775.082(9)(a) — 198 cases
State of Florida v. Dazarian Cordell Lewars, 259 So. 3d 793 (Fla. 2018).
“082 confirms the plain meaning of the specific provision at issue, showing that release from a particular type of facility, namely a prison or its equivalent-and not a county jail-is a necessary component of the PRR definition. The PRR statute's focus on the facility where a…”
— 775.082(9)(a)(1) — 35 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(1)(g) — 3 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(1)(i) — 1 case
— 775.082(9)(a)(1)(k) — 1 case
— 775.082(9)(a)(1)(o) — 3 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(1)(q) — 12 cases
State of Florida v. Dazarian Cordell Lewars, 259 So. 3d 793 (Fla. 2018).
“082 confirms the plain meaning of the specific provision at issue, showing that release from a particular type of facility, namely a prison or its equivalent-and not a county jail-is a necessary component of the PRR definition. The PRR statute's focus on the facility where a…”
— 775.082(9)(a)(2) — 6 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(3) — 15 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(3)(a) — 3 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(3)(c) — 7 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(3)(d) — 7 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(l) — 20 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(l)(c) — 1 case
— 775.082(9)(a)(l)(g) — 1 case
— 775.082(9)(a)(l)(j) — 1 case
— 775.082(9)(a)(l)(o) — 6 cases
— 775.082(9)(a)(l)(p) — 1 case
— 775.082(9)(a)(l)(q) — 7 cases
— 775.082(9)(b) — 21 cases
— 775.082(9)(c) — 21 cases
State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000).
“§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (1997)(emphasis supplied).”
— 775.082(9)(d) — 17 cases
State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000).
“§ 775.082, Fla. Stat. (1997)(emphasis supplied).”
State of Florida v. Dazarian Cordell Lewars, 259 So. 3d 793 (Fla. 2018).
“082 confirms the plain meaning of the specific provision at issue, showing that release from a particular type of facility, namely a prison or its equivalent-and not a county jail-is a necessary component of the PRR definition. The PRR statute's focus on the facility where a…”
— 775.082(9)(d)(1) — 6 cases
— 775.082(9)(d)(l) — 1 case
— 775.082(9)(e) — 3 cases
— 775.082(B)(d) — 1 case
— 775.082(a) — 2 cases
— 775.082(a)(2) — 1 case
— 775.082(a)(a) — 1 case
— 775.082(a)(l)(q) — 1 case
— 775.082(b) — 1 case
— 775.082(c) — 2 cases
— 775.082(d) — 3 cases
— 775.082(l) — 3 cases
— 775.082(l)(a) — 5 cases
— 775.082(l)(b) — 6 cases
— 775.082(l)(b)(3) — 1 case
— 775.082(l)(b)(d) — 1 case
— 775.082(l)(b)(l) — 2 cases
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.