 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ford v. State, CASE NO. 1D07-3203,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 6, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although inmate made an unrefuted claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based on incorrect sentencing information provided by counsel, inmate could not have consecutive sentences imposed under § 921.16(1), Fla. Stat., made concurrent until, on remand, he amended his Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850 motion to seek a withdrawal of his guilty plea.
|
|||||
| Franklin v. State, CASE NO. 1D06-5072,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 6, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In defendant's prosecution on charge of battery on a law enforcement officer, trial court erred by not requiring State to disclose names of others present when corrections officer sustained blow. Defense counsel had filed timely motion to compel documents listing names of those in area, and these names were material under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.220(f).
|
|||||
| Jenkins v. State, No. SC06-839,
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA, March 6, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The fact that police conducted a search of defendant's person, incident to an arrest based on probable cause, that did not comply with the strip search statute, § 901.211, Fla. Stat. (2005), did not require suppression of drug evidence, as § 901.211 did not provide for such a remedy, and there was no a constitutional violation.
|
|||||
| Parsons v. Brake, CASE NO. 1D07-2127,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 6, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred by imputing income to an unemployed mother under § 61.30(2)(b), Fla. Stat., as it did not address her occupational qualifications or her physical ability to work, there was evidence she had serious medical condition and could not work, and father presented no evidence of how many hours a week she could work or of wages she could earn.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, CASE NO. 1D07-6207,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 6, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Tanner v. Tanner, CASE NO. 1D07-4962,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 6, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
