Acosta v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the right of presence does not exist where the resentencing “concerns issues that are purely ministerial in nature”
• explaining that while a fifteen-year mandatory minimum requirement limited the trial court’s discretion at the original sentencing hearing, the removal of that requirement restored sentencing discretion to the trial judge, and thus “the resentencing was no longer a ministerial act”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Jordan v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2014-04-10· cited 45×
• Tyrone Jordan v. State of Florida
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2014-04-10
• ANTHONY MCMILLAN v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2018-09-05
• Fernandez v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-06-12
• Colby McCoggle v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2024-04-10
• Christopher March Renick v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2025-04-17
• Bobby Lee Saviory v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2025-04-25
• Christopher March Renick v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2025-06-27

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Williams v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2007-05-17· cited 165×
• Mullins v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-12-03· cited 16×
• Bines v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-02-21· cited 7×
• Rivers v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-05-02· cited 6×
• Cross v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-10-08· cited 6×