 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Bluntson v. Crosby, CASE NO. 1D05-0864,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 30, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Brown v. State, CASE NO. 1D05-3815,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 30, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| City of Gainesville v. Mass. Life Ins. Co., CASE NO. 1D05-2036, CASE NO. 1D05-2081, CASE NO. 1D05-2083,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 30, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Gipson v. State, CASE NO. 1D05-2797,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 30, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850 claim that defense counsel failed to inform him of the availability of the potential defenses of entrapment and unwillful violation of his probation, and that had been informed of the defenses he would not have entered a plea, was facially sufficient. Entrapment was a defense to violating community control.
|
|||||
| McCrimager v. State, CASE NO. 1D05-1493,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 30, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because strict compliance with Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.830 was necessary to safeguard procedural due process, appellant had to be given the opportunity to present mitigating circumstances. If the trial court maintained its position that appellant was in direct criminal contempt, its written judgment had to recite the facts surrounding this finding.
|
|||||
| Tatum v. State, CASE NO. 1D04-1634,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 30, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under the plain language of Fla. Stat. § 775.082(9), prior confinement in a youthful offender boot camp qualified as a prior incarceration for purposes of making a defendant eligible for an enhanced sentence.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
