Nobles v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he courts have a duty to interpret a statute in the most logical and sensible way and to avoid an interpretation that produces an unreasonable consequence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Tucker
  Louisiana Court of Appeal· 2015-07-08· cited 19×
• and 18SC35, People v. Iannicelli, and People v. Brandt
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 2019-09-23· cited 13×
• State v. Burkhart
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-03-31· cited 4×
• Gammage v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-12-30· cited 2×
• Schmidter v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-12-21· cited 2×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Wakulla County v. Davis
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1981-03-05· cited 73×
• Miele v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1995-06-08· cited 50×
• Williams v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1986-06-26· cited 46×
• State v. Dugan
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1996-09-05· cited 39×
• Lincoln v. FLORIDA PAROLE COM'N
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1994-10-11· cited 27×
• Deason v. Florida Dept. of Corrections
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1998-01-15· cited 15×