Supreme Court of Florida· 4/16/1992

Gore v. State

Citations

599 So. 2d 978
1992 WL 74898

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance to accommodate a witness because the substance of her testimony was presented through deposition
observing that we have never required \the collateral crime to be absolutely identical to the crime charged\
observing that we “ha[ve] never required the collateral crime to be absolutely identical to the crime charged”
observing that we “ha[ve] never required the collateral crime to be absolutely identical to the crime charged”
finding in a kidnapping and murder case, \the required pervasive similarities\ for introduction of evidence of other crimes where there were significant similarities between two victims and the attacks were committed using similar pretenses and ended in similar ways
“While a defendant does have the right to be present when a witness testifies against him, no rule of criminal procedure, statute, or judicial decision has ever expanded this right into a right to be present at the deposition of a defense witness, and we decline to do so now.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

59 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

34 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.