In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the claim was \best reviewed in collateral proceedings\ as no factual record had been developed
• reviewing the district court’s denial of a motion to withdraw for an abuse of discretion
• rejecting a commerce clause challenge to federal child pornography convictions under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) and 2252A(a)(5)(B), both of which contain an express jurisdictional nexus to interstate commerce
• reaching same UNITED STATES v. MCCALLA 13597 conclusion without citing Raich
• where no factual record had been developed to support the claim, the claim was “best reviewed in collateral proceedings”
• where no factual record had been developed to support the claim, the claim was “best reviewed in collateral proceedings”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).