HINOJOS

v.

BLACK, CONSERVATION CENTER SUPERINTENDENT

Citator

Cited By (31 total)

• The Ohio Cas. Grp. v. Parrish, 350 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 1977)
  …ct courts to recognize frivolous Rule 60(b) motions. Indeed, the trial court “is in a much better position to pass upon the issues presented in a motion pursuant to Rule 60(b),” Wilkin v. Sunbeam Corp., 405 F. 2d 165, 166 (CA10 1968). [Cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1126, 93 S.Ct. 940, 35 L.Ed.2d 258.] Accord, Wilson Research Corp. v. Piolite Plastics Corp., 336 F. 2d 303, 305 (CA1 1964); 11 Wright & Miller, supra, at 269. The appellate-leave requirement adds to the delay and expense of litigation and also burdens…
• State v. Camejo, 641 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
  …ue process requirements. For adult victims, such examinations have been ordered where the victim was incompetent, incredible, or uncorroborated.3 45 A.L.R.4th at 355. For example, in State v. Kahinu, 53 Haw. 536, 498 P. 2d 635 (1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1126, 93 S.Ct. 944, 35 [*111] L.Ed.2d 258 (1973), the court found that the lower court must order such an examination if the victim’s testimony is uncorroborated. This amounts to an attack on the victim/witness’ credibility. It was held to be a compellin…
• Simmons v. State, 683 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
  …ps.” The appellate court, noting the wide discretion given to trial courts in evidentiary and witness issues, held that these allegations alone were insufficient to compel testing. In State v. Kahinu, 53 Haw. 536, 498 P. 2d 635 (1972), cert, denied, 409 U.S. 1126, 93 S.Ct. 944, 35 L.Ed.2d 258 (1973), the Hawai'i Supreme Court noted that the mere possibility that a “key witness ... was fabricating his story ... was neither sufficient nor compelling grounds for such examination.” Id., 498 P. 2d at 642 (citing…