Skip to main content

Russell v. State

Citations

  • 982 So. 2d 642
  • 2008 WL 1901666

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing hearsay is admissible in violation of probation proceedings, but hearsay alone may not form the sole basis for revocation
  • recognizing hearsay is admissible in violation of probation proceedings, but hearsay alone may not form the sole basis for revocation
  • explaining that review on appeal is “under an abuse of discretion standard” (citing Bernhardt, 288 So. 2d at 501)
  • stating that an appellate court “reviews the trial court’s revocation [of probation] under an abuse of discretion standard”
  • holding Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), does not apply to revocation proceedings
  • explaining that because Crawford v. Washington addresses the use of testimonial hearsay only in the context of a “criminal prosecution,” the decision in Crawford does not apply to probation revocation proceedings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Quince

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.