Skip to main content

Love v. State

Citations

  • 247 So. 3d 609

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 2017 amendment is substantive in nature and thus could not be applied retroactively
  • holding that the 2017 amendment to section 776.032 is not purely procedural and thus cannot be applied retroactively to cases pending on appeal and certifying conflict with our decision in Martin
  • applying the 2017 amendment prospectively after concluding it was a substantive change in the law and certifying conflict with Martin
  • applying the 2017 amendment prospectively after concluding it was a substantive change in the law and certifying conflict with Martin
  • same and certifying conflict with Martin

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.