O'NEILL v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• out-of-state statute need not mirror Florida statute, but must be substantially similar in elements and penalties to be a qualifying offense
• in order to qualify as substantially similar, the South Carolina statute need not “mirror” the Florida statute; “[t]he out-of-state conviction need only be ‘substantially similar’... in elements and penalties[]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• O'Neill v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1996-08-22· cited 5×
• Robinson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1996-03-27· cited 4×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Massey v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1992-12-03· cited 41×
• Reynolds v. Cochran
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1962-02-21· cited 26×
• State v. Thompkins
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1975-01-15· cited 10×
• Griffith v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1995-02-23· cited 9×
• Frazier v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1987-11-25· cited 9×
• Shaw v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1987-07-22· cited 9×
• Johnson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1985-10-17· cited 8×
• Roberts v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1987-05-21· cited 7×
• Pugh v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1985-02-19· cited 6×
• Helfant v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1994-01-19· cited 1×