Skip to main content

McKee v. State

Citations

  • 450 So. 2d 563

How courts have described this case

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

  • defendant who acquiesced in jury instruction that crimes charged in separate counts were to be considered separately is estopped from advancing claim that verdicts returned by jury inconsistent
  • “the defendant is estopped from advancing the claim of inconsistent verdicts,” because “the defendant not only failed to object to the instructions, but also expressed his agreement to its submission”
  • “the defendant is estopped from advancing the claim of inconsistent verdicts,” because “the defendant not only failed to object to the instructions, but also expressed his agreement to its submission”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Schwartz, C.J., and Hubbart and Nesbitt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

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.