R.M. v. State

870 So. 2d 917, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5467, 2004 WL 840260
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 21, 2004·No. No. 3D03-2624·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Ragsdale v. State, 720 So.2d 203 (Fla.1998); Evans v. State, 795 So.2d 275 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Williams v. State, 689 So.2d 393 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), review denied, 697 So.2d 513 (Fla.1997); Kopel v. Kopel, 832 So.2d 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)(Schwartz, C.J., specially concurring), review denied, 848 So.2d 1154 (Fla.2003).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

R.M. v. State, 870 So. 2d 917, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5467, 2004 WL 840260 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

870 So. 2d 917 (R.M. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kopel v. Kopel
832 So. 2d 108 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Ragsdale v. State
720 So. 2d 203 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1998)
Williams v. State
689 So. 2d 393 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Evans v. State
795 So. 2d 275 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)