 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Schulz v. Schulz, Case No. 2D06-5245,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As both parties' financial affidavits listed a former husband's self-published books and vehicle as nonmarital property, the trial court erred in its equitable distribution order by treating these assets as marital property.
|
|||||
| Seme v. State, No. 3D06-1712,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Earlier appeal of denial of appellant's post-conviction relief motion did not bar later, belated appeal of the denial, because transcript of evidentiary hearing was not transmitted by clerk as required by Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(3) in the earlier appeal, and parties did not brief the merits. However, denial of appellant's motion was proper.
|
|||||
| Spoor v. State, No. 4D06-2675,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After defense argued that identification of defendant was mistaken because victim did not see tattoos on perpetrator's arm although defendant had such tattoos, prosecutor's closing argument was improper because he claimed that defendant had gotten tattooed after the crime. There was no evidence as to when defendant obtained his tattoos.
|
|||||
| Stang v. State, No. 4D07-4019,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Berry, No. 3D07-904,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Ramos, No. 4D06-4629,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of theft charge as time-barred was error because case was commenced pursuant to ¿ 775.15(5), Fla. Stat. when defendant received notice to appear at arraignment. Although defendant later failed to appear at a pretrial hearing and capias was not executed until nine years later, the case was timely commenced and was not time-barred.
|
|||||
| Sutton v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, No. 4D07-3653,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Offender was simultaneously given early release and committed to civil confinement pending a final Florida's Jimmy Ryce Act (JRA) determination; both his early release and the JRA proceedings were terminated, and he was sent back to prison. He was entitled to credit for JRA confinement, as it was equivalent to incarceration.
|
|||||
| Sutton v. State, Case No. 2D07-321,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After defendant used four of his five peremptory challenges to dismiss white female jurors, court denied his request to peremptorily dismiss fifth while female. As the genuineness of defendant's race-neutral explanation of peremptory strike was primarily an assessment of his credibility, and the ruling was not clearly erroneous, it was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Thompson v. Cleary, No. 4D07-3078,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, March 12, 2008, Decided
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. |
