Copeland v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• \There are no exact `magic words' or phrases which must be used by the defense in order to necessitate the inquiry but only the fact that a discovery request has not been met.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Ramirez v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1995-01-05· cited 72×
• State v. Evans
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2000-10-05· cited 48×
• Smith v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2009-03-19· cited 44×
• Jones v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2010-04-07· cited 21×
• State v. Burke
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-05-13· cited 7×

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Richardson v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1971-03-31· cited 927×
• Delap v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1983-09-15· cited 100×
• Cumbie v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1977-03-17· cited 82×
• Stokes v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1989-07-06· cited 69×
• Ramirez v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1989-03-16· cited 45×
• Wilcox v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1979-02-08· cited 45×
• In Interest of FR
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-03-10· cited 26×
• Raffone v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1986-02-05· cited 19×
• Lee v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-01-27· cited 15×