Polk v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “a defendant should be estopped to receive an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction claim when the basis of the claim is that he lied under oath at the relevant hearing”
• agreeing that “a defendant should be estopped to receive an evidentia-ry hearing on a postconviction claim when the basis of the claim is that he lied under oath at the relevant hearing”
• “[A] defendant should be estopped to receive an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction claim when the basis of the claim is that he lied under oath at the relevant hearing.” (citing Iacono v. State, 930 So. 2d 829, 831-32 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Kepford v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-07-01· cited 2×
• Eduardo Santiago, Jr. v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2018-08-27· cited 1×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Leroux
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1996-12-19· cited 196×
• Iacono v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-06-07· cited 36×
• Scheele v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-05-09· cited 35×
• Thompson v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1977-06-23· cited 21×
• Ely v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2009-06-12· cited 5×