Diaz v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that officers may conduct a protective sweep when they “have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the protective sweep is necessary due to a safety threat or the destruction of evidence”
• “[W]here a motion tests the suppression of contraband which the defendant is charged with possessing, the motion is usually considered dispositive in the case.”
• “ ‘[WJhere a motion tests the suppression of contraband which the defendant is charged with possessing, the motion is usually considered dispositive in the case.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Rowell v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-03-28· cited 8×
• Fernandez v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-06-15· cited 5×
• Pamphile v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-06-29· cited 5×
• Rozzo v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-12-07· cited 5×
• Daniels v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-01-18· cited 2×
• Ivory Brunson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2014-10-01· cited 1×
• Aikens v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-02-29· cited 1×
• STATE OF FLORIDA v. M. B. W.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-07-31
• CHARLES SEARCY v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-11-20
• Judson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-01-05
• State v. Barbary
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-04-18
• TIFFANY GRAVES v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2022-01-05
• State of Florida v. Harris
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2024-10-16