King v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that section 893.05 sets forth an affirmative defense
• “It is clear that s. 893.05 is an exception to the prohibitions of s. 893.13 and does not constitute a separate violation of Chapter 893.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Johnson v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1992-07-23· cited 29×
• Jordan v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-03-10· cited 27×
• Vileta v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-08-31· cited 16×
• Sanders v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1980-07-30· cited 16×
• Wallis v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-09-07· cited 12×
• Danzy v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-08-07· cited 10×
• Faison v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1980-11-19· cited 8×
• Johnson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1991-04-18· cited 6×
• Rodenberg v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2016-08-03· cited 1×
• STATE OF FLORIDA v. MARCIA LYNNE SILLS
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-09-18

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Pope v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1972-09-27· cited 53×
• Youngker v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1968-10-25· cited 40×
• State v. Vinson
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1974-07-19· cited 17×
• State v. Pope
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1973-07-11· cited 3×