Kiefer v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• stating “there must be sufficient evidence in the record to support application of a depreciation rate”
• “We have held that the contemporaneous objection rule applies to restitution proceedings.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Thompson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-09-07· cited 17×
• RACHELLE MARIE JAMES v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-07-12· cited 3×
• Medlin v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-12-04· cited 3×
• CRICKET KATHLEEN TOOLE v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-02-20· cited 2×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Harrell v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2005-02-10· cited 120×
• Crumbley v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-06-04· cited 15×
• Noland v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-05-07· cited 13×
• Ibrahim v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-02-13· cited 12×
• Gliszczynski v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1995-04-13· cited 10×
• Molter v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-11-17· cited 9×
• Mitchell v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1995-12-08· cited 9×
• Ashton v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2001-06-01· cited 4×