Skip to main content

Mills v. State

Citations

  • 822 So. 2d 1284
  • 2002 WL 1338538

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that section 784.07 was not an enhancement statute because the victim's status as a law enforcement officer was an element of a reclassified crime
  • finding that in the absence of contrary legislative intent related statutes should be read in pari materia
  • finding that section 784.07 is an enhancement statute rather than a statute defining a new criminal offense
  • noting that § 784.07 is an enhancement and reclassification statute rather than a statute defining a new criminal offense
  • noting in the absence of a contrary legislative intent, the two statutory provisions in question should be read in pari materia

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lewis

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.