Skip to main content

Love v. State

Citations

  • 235 So. 3d 1037

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 trial court may not rely on evidence of subsequent misconduct, whether or not that misconduct resulted in an actual arrest
  • holding that while the sentencing judge made no specific mention of the uncharged offenses presented by the State, the State failed to meet its burden of proof of showing that the court relied on impermissible factors in imposing the sentence
  • \This court held that the type of error addressed in Norvil is fundamental error that may be considered on appeal despite a lack of objection below.\ (citing Fernandez, 212 So. 3d at 496)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Larose, Morris, Silberman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 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.