Skip to main content

Preston v. State

Citations

  • 970 So. 2d 789
  • 2007 WL 1556649

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that in light of the evidence of the defendant’s guilt presented at trial, “the newly -9- discovered DNA evidence . . . would probably not produce an acquittal on retrial”
  • finding that newly discovered DNA evidence showing that hair recovered did not match the victim would probably not produce an acquittal on retrial because the case against the defendant was nevertheless a strong case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

48 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.