DELAROSA v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that allegation that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to impeach a state witness with a prior inconsistent statement was legally sufficient
• noting “that even if this court had determined that ground (2)(a) was conclusory, we would be constrained to reverse and remand for the postconviction court to strike the claim with leave for Delarosa to amend within a reasonable period of time” under Spera
• reversing the denial of such a claim as conclusory

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Vincent J. Klaus v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2018-01-08· cited 1×
• Isidore v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-12-16
• Mayes v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-02-11

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Spera v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2007-11-01· cited 504×
• Peede v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1999-08-19· cited 142×
• Mohr v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-09-11· cited 5×
• Monroe v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-06-05· cited 5×
• Mann v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-11-06· cited 2×
• Clark v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1995-10-27· cited 2×