Saidi 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 section 836.10 did not require “the actual intent to do harm or the ability to carry out the threat”
• holding section 836.10 is not constitutionally infirm for overbreadth
• probation is a matter of grace and is subject to exercise of trial court's discretion
• “When a question is raised concerning the relevancy of a special condition of probation, the record must support the imposition of the condition.” (citing McCarthren v. State, 635 So.2d 1005, 1006 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994))
• “[S]ection 836.10 is not vague.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).