District Court of Appeal of Florida· 12/6/1988

State v. Zamora

Citations

534 So. 2d 864
1988 WL 129137

How courts have described this case

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

disclosure not required where sole showing was that informant was merely present during illegal drug transaction or acted as mere tipster
disclosure only ordered where defendant asserts a legally recognizable defense, supported by sworn proof
even when technically deficient, if motion comes close to establishing right to disclosure, in camera review is required to determine if the confidential informant's testimony would be helpful to the defense
“To invoke an in camera hearing, a defendant must file a sworn motion or affidavit alleging facts concerning the informant’s 1 Thomas v. State, 28 So. 3d 240, 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Schwartz, C.J., and Hubbart and Daniel S. Pearson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

41 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.