Riley 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 neither trial court or appellate court could address factual discrepancies between defendant's rule 3.853 motion and state's response without considering the trial transcript or conducting an evidentiary hearing
• \Neither the trial court nor this court can address the factual discrepancies that exist between Riley's allegations and the state's response without considering the trial transcript or without the trial court conducting an evidentiary hearing.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Schofield v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-12-12· cited 8×
• Carter v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2005-10-19· cited 4×
• Brown v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-10-19· cited 4×
• Reddick v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-04-12· cited 3×
• Collins v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-04-07· cited 2×
• Jones v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2005-08-04

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• King v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2002-01-16· cited 53×
• Zollman v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2002-07-10· cited 23×
• Knighten v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2002-09-04· cited 15×