Crooks v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Florida‟s version of Section 123(1) is not violated unless “the driver‟s conduct created a reasonable safety concern” (citing Fla. Stat. § 316.089(1) (1995))
• interpreting section 316.155 as requiring “evidence that the driver’s conduct created a reasonable safety concern” before a vehicle may be stopped
• comparing section 316.155 with the statute requiring vehicles to stay within their proper lanes and interpreting both as requiring “evidence that the driver’s conduct created a reasonable safety concern” before a vehicle may be stopped
• “a violation does not occur in isolation, but requires evidence that the driver s conduct created a reasonable safety concern”
• “[A] violation does not occur in isolation, but requires evidence that the driver’s conduct created a reasonable safety concern”
• no violation of statute nearly identical to § 28-729(1) even when driver crossed edge line three times

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).