Lee v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that allowing thirty days after mandate for filing a rule 3.850 motion after expiration of two-year time limit is appropriate when a rule 3.800(a) motion has been filed at a time when a rule 3.850 motion also could have been timely filed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Columbro v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2001-02-23· cited 10×
• Woody v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-11-05· cited 6×
• Donaldson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2000-06-02

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Mancino
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1998-06-11· cited 282×
• Toro v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1998-10-01· cited 49×
• Daily v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-04-07· cited 12×
• Carridine v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-09-22· cited 3×
• Quartucci v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-06-30· cited 2×