Wilson v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing and remanding the order summarily denying the appellant’s motion to return property and reasoning that “[b]ecause the motion was facially sufficient, the trial court was required to either conclusively refute the allegations or hold an evidentiary hearing”
• reversing and remanding the order summarily denying the appellant’s motion to return property and reasoning that “[b]ecause the motion was facially sufficient, the trial court was required to either conclusively refute the allegations or hold an evidentiary hearing”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Ooms v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2014-05-05
• Nofsinger v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-08-24

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Bailey v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-07-27· cited 5×
• Jones v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2010-08-18· cited 3×