Peraza v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the resident of a home lacked standing to challenge the search of the garage based on his “unequivocal statements that he knew nothing about that part of the residence and didn’t have anything to do with that part of the residence”
• on review of a trial court’s decision on a motion to suppress, “An appellate court is bound by the trial court’s findings of historical fact if those findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence. However, a de novo standard applies to questions of law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Santiago v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2014-02-26· cited 10×
• Murdock v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2013-06-12· cited 6×
• Smith v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-04-25· cited 5×
• Bruce Bernard Strachan v. State of Florida
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2016-06-29· cited 4×
• State v. Parker
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2014-08-22· cited 2×
• Gonzalez v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-06-28· cited 1×
• Aikens v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-02-29· cited 1×
• Pamphile v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2013-04-03
• THOMAS HARGROVE v. STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2024-04-19