Skip to main content

Jones v. State

Citations

  • 612 So. 2d 1370
  • 1992 WL 370465

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 contemporaneous objection rule applies to such comments and an appellate court will not reverse in the absence of an objection unless the comment is so prejudicial as to be fundamental error
  • no requirement that the jury be given instructions on each nonstatutory mitigator that may be considered
  • “We find that the refusal to dismiss [Petitioner’s lawyer] was within the court’s discretion and that no error occurred.”
  • “After Jones filed this motion, [Petitioner’s lawyer] moved for permission to withdraw, claiming that Jones’ motion and allegations had created an irreconcilable conflict that destroyed the attorney/client relationship.”
  • sense of rejection does not provide a valid pretense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

34 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.