STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
RICHARD ANDERS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the issues presented were resolved by a prior decision, State v. Hunter.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal certified questions regarding agreements with convicted drug traffickers for reduced sentences in exchange for set…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
We review State v. Anders, 560 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified the following questions as being of great public importance: *
Does an agreement whereby a convicted drug trafficker will receive a substantially reduced sentence in exchange for setting up new drug deals and testifying for the state violate the holding in State v. Glosson [, 462 So. 2d 1082 (Fla.1985)]? Assuming the existence of a due process violation under Glosson, does Glosson ⅛ holding extend to a codefendant who was not the direct target of the government’s agent?
Id. at 290 n. 3, 293. We recently addressed these issues in State v. Hunter, 586 So. 2d 319- (Fla.1991), and accordingly, we vacate the judgment below and remand this case to the district court for reconsideration in light of Hunter. It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, barkett, grimes, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur. *
We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (31 total)
-
Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So. 3d 1251 (Fla. 2014)…harmless must be placed on the party who improperly introduced the evidence. [Placing] the burden of proof on the party against whom the evidence is used ... would simply encourage the introduction of improper evidence.” Gormley v. GTE Prod. Corp., 587 So. 2d 455, 459 (Fla.1991). The no reasonable possibility test also strikes the appropriate balance between the need for finality and the integrity of the judicial process. The test recognizes that not all errors have a reasonable possibility of contributing…1 / 3
-
Rollins v. Pizzarelli, 761 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2000)…insured has paid a separate premium. The common-law rule prohibited both the introduction of evidence of collateral insurance benefits received, and the setoff of any collateral source benefits from the damage award. See Gormley v. GTE Prods. Corp., 587 So. 2d 455, 457-59 (Fla.1991). As an alteration of the common law, the statutory provisions that allow the introduction into evidence and setoff of collateral insurance benefits must be narrowly construed. Lastly, we disagree with the dissents in this case th…
-
Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 1992)…relevant to the determination of the issue here. . Courts must continually be concerned that insurance coverage not be introduced to the jury because of its potential to impact adversely upon the plaintiffs claim. See Gormley v. GTE Products Corp., 587 So. 2d 455 (Fla.1991). . Although hard to imagine. Union Central suggests that a plaintiff might not present to the jury the medical bills which it has paid: In such a case, the intervenor would have the right to present argument to the court on whether the p…
Previewing 3 of 31 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Boyce E. Glosson, 462 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 1985)
- State v. Hunter, 586 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1991)
- State v. Anders, 560 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)