Brown v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that although “the trial court made reference to a policy to deny motions for a continuance when they were made after a late substitution 4 of counsel,” it properly exercised its discretion in hearing argument and ruling on the motion
• defendant filed a series of four motions for continuance beginning two weeks prior to date of trial
• “Neither party specifically argued McKay nor any other cases during the motion hearings; however, the factors listed in McKay were essentially argued before the court.”
• appellate court “must” consider these factors in reviewing denial of a continuance
• “We do not suggest that counsel and the trial court must engage in an elaborate discussion of caselaw; instead, a trial court’s exercise of discretion need only be based on consideration of the McKay factors.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Madison v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2013-03-06· cited 12×
• Brown v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-04-03· cited 1×
• Boffo v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-05-31
• JOSE PEROZO v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2023-02-22
• Rasmussen v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2024-11-20

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. DiGuilio
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1986-07-17· cited 2,703×
• United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez
  Supreme Court· 2006-06-26· cited 1,863×
• Overton v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2001-09-13· cited 80×
• McKay v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1986-12-03· cited 36×
• Buschardt v. Jones
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1999-03-31· cited 35×
• Trocola v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-03-12· cited 11×