BURROWS

v.

STATE

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Galindez v. State, 955 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 2007)
  …icks v. State, 905 So. 2d 990, 991 (Fla. 3d DCA) (holding that because Apprendi does not apply retroactively, neither does Blakely), review denied, 917 So. 2d 193 (Fla.2005); Burrows v. State, 890 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (same), review denied, 914 So. 2d 952 (Fla.2005); McBride v. State, 884 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (same). Nevertheless, we have traditionally held that “resentencing should proceed de novo on all issues bearing on the proper sentence.” Morton v. State, 789 So. 2d 324, 334 (Fla.2001…
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Knapp, 234 So. 3d 843 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
  …This Court first examines prongs two and three to determine its certiorari jurisdiction. See Holden Cove, Inc. v. 4 Mac Holdings Inc., 948 So. 2d 1041, 1041 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Barker v. Barker, 909 So. 2d 333, 336 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), rev. denied, 914 So. 2d 952 (Fla. 2005). If jurisdictional prongs- two' and three are not fulfilled, we are bound to dismiss the petition. See Capital One, N.A., 34 So. 3d at 212. Certiorari is the appropriate vehicle to review an interlocutory discovery order requiring the p…
• Cutts v. State, 940 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
  …lakely is not to be retroactively applied on collateral review to convictions that became final before Blakely was decided. Hughes v. State, 933 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Burrows v. State, 890 So. 2d 286, 287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review denied, 914 So. 2d 952 (Fla.2005). In so holding, we have aligned ourselves with the Third, Fourth, and Fifth District Courts of Appeal. See Langford v. State, 929 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Thomas v. State, 914 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Galindez v. State, 910 S…