Supreme Court of Florida· 10/6/2005

Chandler v. Crosby

Citations

916 So. 2d 728
2005 WL 2456006

How courts have described this case

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

noting that these factors should be used to evaluate whether the constitutional determination is procedural rather than substantive in nature
declining to retroactively apply determination when the new rule “does not present a more compelling objective that outweighs the importance of finality.”
“[I]f Crawford was applied retroactively, the administration of justice would be greatly affected.”
“This rationale for the new rule weighs against its retroactive application because the rule’s purpose is not to improve the accuracy of trials or even to improve the reliability of evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

30 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

61 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Chandler v. Crosby

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.