Skip to main content

Freeman v. State

Citations

  • 787 So. 2d 152
  • 2001 WL 456503

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that error in first part of burglary instruction was cured by correct instruction in second portion of the instruction
  • concluding that any error in an instruction referring to intent to commit “the offense of burglary” was cured by the remainder of the instruction’s specific reference to theft as the required offense
  • concluding that any error in an instruction referring to intent to commit “the offense of burglary” was cured by the remainder of the instruction’s specific reference to theft as the required offense
  • holding that the erroneous use of the term “burglary” in the beginning of the written jury instructions was not fundamental because any error was cured by the correct use of the term “theft” in the latter portion of the written instructions
  • where jury was properly instructed on issue in other instruction.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Klein

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.