 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Luedtke v. State, Case No. 2D06-4580,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because trial counsel's affirmative misadvise regarding the applicability of the Jimmy Ryce Act, §§ 394.910-.931, Fla. Stat. (2004), provided good cause to support defendant's Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.170(f) motion to withdraw his plea to sexual battery under § 794.011(5), Fla. Stat. (2004), the trial court erred in denying the motion.
|
|||||
| Mauldin v. State, No. 4D08-3985,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As the gravamen of § 784.011(1), Fla. Stat. was the placing in fear of a person, and the legislature intended separate punishments when a threat placed more than one person in well-founded fear, the prohibition against double jeopardy was not violated where a prisoner was given consecutive sentences when there were two victims of the assault.
|
|||||
| Nodal v. State, No. 3D06-1596,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Petion v. State, No. 4D06-3888,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As there was insufficient evidence to establish his constructive possession of marijuana found inside the vehicle, which was jointly occupied by defendant and three other passengers, defendant's conviction for possession of cannabis with intent to sell was reversed.
|
|||||
| R. S. v. S. L. A., CASE NOS. 1D08-1833/1D08-2474 CONSOLIDATED,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Robinson v. State, No. 3D06-2534,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As it was entirely reasonable for the officers, in reliance on defendant's assertion that he was wanted on murder charges, even thought that was not the case, to transport him to the station in handcuffs, and defendant never asked the officers to verify that there were pending charges, the motion to suppress the confession was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Shaw v. Nelson, CASE NO. 1D08-1677,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Custody modification and child support calculation were upheld; detailed oral calculations proved that former wife established grounds for modification and support in amounts stated on record. Court did not deviate from § 61.30(6), Fla. Stat., in determining presumptive minimum support amount; therefore, § 61.30(1)(a) findings were not required.
|
|||||
| Sitarik v. JFK Med. Ctr. Ltd. Pships, No. 4D08-152,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Anesthesiologist should not have been compelled to arbitrate his breach of contract and other claims against a medical center and others; based on language in a professional services agreement (PSA), anesthesiologist was a contractor's representative, not a party to the PSA, and PSA's arbitration clause only applied to parties.
|
|||||
| Slocum v. State, CASE NO. 1D06-5274,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, March 4, 2009, 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. |
