664 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 839 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
When a defendant challenges prior convictions on a scoresheet via a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion, the State bears the burden of producing competent evidence that the prior convictions were correctly included. The trial court erred in including convictions from more than ten years befo
-
An Apprendi/Erlinger claim that jury findings were required for a VFOSC designation is a procedural error not cognizable under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) because it alleges an error in the sentencing process rather than an error in the sentencing order itself. A
-
A sentence that does not exceed the statutory maximum for the crime does not violate Apprendi, even if the trial court found additional facts in imposing it.
-
A trial court abuses its discretion by admitting a police officer's testimony that plastic sandwich bags are typically used by drug dealers to separate larger quantities of marijuana into predetermined sizes for sale. Such testimony constitutes inadmissible general criminal behav
-
The trial court abused its discretion by overruling the defense's objection to Detective Tabares' testimony that the victim's demeanor was "genuine," which invaded the jury's exclusive province to assess credibility, and the State failed to establish the error was harmless beyond
-
The trial court properly conducted a Faretta inquiry when Bandera-Valier waived counsel before the probation violation hearing, and no renewed Faretta inquiry was required at the hearing itself; however, the court erred by failing to renew the offer of counsel prior to sentencing
-
The trial court committed reversible error by excluding non-hearsay testimony regarding threats made to the defendant when the statements were offered to show their effect on the defendant listener and to explain her state of mind in seeking assistance, and the State failed to de
-
Jermaine Antwan Davis appealed his conviction and sentence for aggravated battery, challenging his sentencing as a habitual felony offender (HFO) and prison releasee reoffender (PRR) under the Erlinger v. United States standard. The court affirmed his conviction and sentence, hol
-
Billy Joe Darby appeals his conviction for attempted manslaughter, challenging the trial court's denial of a jury instruction on misdemeanor battery and the court's overruling of his objection to the prosecutor's closing argument implying he had a duty to retreat. The appellate c
-
A sentencing judge's mere exposure to improper information about uncharged conduct does not require reversal unless there is evidence the sentence was actually based on that impermissible factor.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in admitting body-worn camera footage and a 911 call recording, and that the sentence imposed was appropriate.
-
Stefan Eberhard Zappey, a former DOD elementary school teacher, was convicted of sexually abusing four students at Patch Elementary School in Germany between 2006-2010. On appeal, Zappey challenged the trial court's exclusion of expert testimony on memory reliability, arguing it
-
Postconviction review of a sentence based on Erlinger is improper because Erlinger was a direct-appeal case involving required jury findings, not a postconviction case, and procedural rules announced in direct appeals do not apply retroactively to final convictions.
-
The court held that the applicant failed to show that the state court's denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
When a departure sentence rests on both valid and invalid reasons, the sentence is affirmed if the record conclusively shows the trial court would have imposed the same sentence using only the valid reasons.
-
A trial court abuses its discretion by denying a for-cause challenge when a prospective juror expresses unequivocal bias against one party, and by excluding photographs that have been properly authenticated through the pictorial testimony method merely on lack-of-predicate ground
-
-
Two members of the Gangster Disciples gang, Lesley Green and Philmon Chambers, were convicted of RICO conspiracy and related murders in a three-victim retaliation scheme and sentenced to life in prison, with Chambers receiving two consecutive life sentences plus an additional 120
-
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in conducting the Nelson hearing, any error in the PRR sentencing would be harmless, and the trial court properly declined to hold a competency hearing because no reasonable grounds existed to question Dowdell's competency.
-
Timothy Hightower, a state prisoner convicted of cocaine trafficking offenses within 1,000 feet of a church, sought federal habeas relief challenging his conviction on grounds that the trial court improperly denied severance of separate charges, that a detective's testimony regar
-
The court held that the petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence was time-barred and equitable tolling was not warranted, thus dismissing the motion.
-
The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of the defendant's prior state drug convictions, even though they were Alford pleas, because they were relevant to intent and not substantially outweighed by prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-10
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence and that the correct legal standard was applied.
-
A final judgment in a dissolution of marriage must explicitly identify the child support guidelines worksheet in the record, articulate the specific amount of any imputed income, include a provision ordering the obligor to maintain health insurance for minor children if reasonabl
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision denying disability benefits, adopting the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-12-23
The court held that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standard, affirming the Commissioner's denial of benefits.
-
The court held that the plaintiff is not entitled to attorney fees under the EAJA because the government's position was substantially justified, despite the ALJ's failure to adequately articulate her reasoning.
-
Venue was proper in Alachua County under section 910.15(1) because the dissemination of the communications was made in that county when the victim received them, regardless of where the defendant sent them. A prior out-of-state conviction qualifies as a similar law under section
-
The appellate court affirmed the defendant's convictions, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting prison communications as co-conspirator statements and evidence of identity/motive/intent. The court also found no abuse of discretion in admitting a r
-
Joseph Haas, convicted of arson and attempted manslaughter arising from a fire at his house, sought federal habeas relief on grounds including double jeopardy, due process, and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court denied all claims but issued a certificate of appealabilit
-
Fla. 2d DCA·
2024-10-02
When vacation of a conviction would change a defendant's scoresheet, the defendant is entitled to resentencing using a corrected scoresheet unless the error is harmless because the record conclusively shows the trial court would have imposed the same sentence.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-09
The court held that the ALJ's decision denying disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and proper legal standards, and any procedural errors were harmless.
-
The court held that the ALJ failed to adequately consider medical opinions from Dr. Marshall and Dr. Lopez-Nunes, warranting reversal and remand.
-
Jabbaar Mujaahid Abdul challenged his Florida conviction and sentence through federal habeas corpus, raising four grounds including claims of prosecutorial Brady violations, ineffective assistance of counsel, structural defects, and an alleged conflict of interest with his public
-
The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding that the state court's rejection of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
Denial of a motion to disqualify the trial judge is harmless error where it lacks a reasonable probability of contributing to the defendant's conviction.
-
The court held that federal habeas review cannot grant relief for state law errors, and to the extent federal claims were raised, they were meritless.
-
Cory Barrant Sivik sought federal habeas relief challenging his state conviction for lewd or lascivious molestation of a child under twelve, arguing that statements he made during a police-orchestrated controlled telephone call violated his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. The d
-
A trial court properly denies a rule 3.800(a) motion challenging sentencing when the motion raises claims that are procedurally barred or not cognizable under that rule.
-
The court held that the Florida Supreme Court's determination that the conditional-release program is constitutional was reasonable, and therefore, the Third DCA's denial of the petitioner's state-court habeas petition was also reasonable.
-
The Court held that the Petitioner's claims challenging his civil commitment under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 lacked merit, as the state court's findings were supported by evidence and complied with federal and state law.
-
David John Posta, convicted of DUI manslaughter in Florida, sought federal habeas relief challenging his conviction and 40-year sentence on multiple grounds, including claims that the trial court improperly considered an uncounseled Virginia conviction at sentencing and lacked ju
-
The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and due process violations were meritless.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his decision to testify and a rejected plea offer were without merit, and the cumulative error claim also failed.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were adjudicated on the merits by the state court and did not meet the high bar for federal habeas relief under AEDPA, as counsel's strategic decisions were reasonable and motions to suppress would have been futile.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-24
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the ALJ's determination that the plaintiff was not disabled and could perform her past relevant work.
-
The appellate court affirmed a second-degree murder conviction, holding that the trial court properly admitted a witness's grand jury testimony as substantive evidence and that an improper prosecutorial comment during closing arguments was harmless error.
-
Andre Alston sought to vacate his 15-year conviction and sentence for firearm possession by a convicted felon under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing prosecutorial misconduct, speedy trial violations, ineffective assistance of counsel, and other constitutional violations. The district co
-
The federal court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus because the state court's determination that the defendant was competent to stand trial, made nunc pro tunc, was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determinati
-
The court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration, finding no manifest error of law or fact in the prior denial of his motion to vacate sentence.