State v. Brugman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that \[a]n attorney's unsworn statement does not establish a fact in absence of a stipulation\ and does not constitute \competent evidence\
• holding that “[a]n attorney’s unsworn statement does not establish a fact in absence of a stipulation” and does not constitute “competent evidence”
• holding that counsel’s ünsworn statements on a motion to dismiss were not competent substantial evidence absent a stipulation
• holding that, absent a stipulation, unsworn statements by attorney on motion to dismiss criminal charge do not establish facts, and the failure of opposing counsel to object does not cure the deficiency because orders on such a motion must be supported by competent evidence
• reversing an order dismissing the information based on entrapment, noting that because ‘‘Brugman did not bring this motion [to dis-missO pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).