Mann v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “[W]hen the information charges penetration or union, the assessment of victim penetration points is error absent a specific finding that penetration occurred.” (citing Chat- man v. State, 943 So.2d 327, 328-29 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Blair v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2016-10-05· cited 4×
• GERALDO ALEXIS v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2018-11-07· cited 2×
• Lakey v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-08-28· cited 2×
• Hatten v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2014-08-01· cited 1×
• Jackson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2014-09-12
• Stump v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2025-09-17

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. McBride
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2003-05-15· cited 335×
• Brooks v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2007-10-25· cited 134×
• State v. Mann
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-02-20· cited 26×
• Chatman v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-12-13· cited 4×
• Mansur v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2005-10-11· cited 1×