Quesada v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “Repeated calls alone do not necessitate a finding óf entrapment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State of Florida v. Jamal Rashad Laing
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2016-01-06· cited 11×
• Collins v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-04-13· cited 8×
• Cline v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-05-02· cited 1×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Munoz v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1993-10-14· cited 111×
• Neal v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1997-02-10· cited 42×
• Lusby v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1987-06-24· cited 13×
• Nadeau v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1995-12-20· cited 12×
• State v. Konces
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1988-03-08· cited 12×
• Gonzalez v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1988-05-31· cited 11×
• Mason v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1997-09-03· cited 6×
• State v. Petro
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1991-09-13· cited 3×
• Heydel v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1991-07-03· cited 2×
• State v. Davis
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-12-28· cited 1×