Supreme Court of Florida· 3/15/2001

Stephens v. State

Citations

787 So. 2d 747
2001 WL 252160

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 trial court’s denial of a motion for new trial is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard
holding that a “bare bones” motion for new trial does not preserve any specific argument for appeal
holding that to be entitled to a special jury instruction, the defendant must prove: (1) the special instruction was supported by the evidence; (2) the standard instruction did not adequately cover the defendant’s theory of defense; and (3
holding that a challenge to the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal “was not preserved for appeal because [the defendant] made a bare bones motion for judgment of acquittal, without any specific argument”
noting that to be entitled to special instruction, defendant must show that “the standard instruction did not adequately cover 2 the theory of defense”
noting that, on appeal from a conviction, the defendant “has the burden of demonstrating that the trial court abused its discretion in giving standard instructions” and to be entitled to a special jury instruction, the defense must establish “(1

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

64 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.