Skip to main content

Whipple v. State

Citations

  • 431 So. 2d 1011

How courts have described this case

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

  • declining to write opinion where “an opinion would not have been of any significant assistance to the bench or bar of this state”
  • rejecting argument that district court's unelaborated per curiam affirmance of the trial court's decision thwarted right of access to the courts because the constitution's guarantee of a right to review does not extend to supreme court review
  • “The fact remains, however, that most of the cases cited by zealous advocates as being in direct conflict with our PCA decisions are simply not close enough to write about.”
  • \We write opinions in all reversals and remands\
  • \We write opinions in all reversals and remands\
  • motion should not re-argue matters already argued

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

10 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.