The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title V
JUDICIAL BRANCH

Chapter 30
SHERIFFS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 30.20

30.20 False return.—For every false return, the sheriff shall forfeit and pay $500, one moiety thereof to the party aggrieved, and the other moiety to him or her who will sue for the same, to be recovered with costs by action of debt; and the said sheriff shall be further liable to an action of the party aggrieved.

History.—s. 2, ch. 997, 1859; RS 1251; GS 1679; RGS 2887; CGL 4584; s. 181, ch. 95-147.

F.S. 30.20 on Google Scholar

F.S. 30.20 on Casetext

Amendments to 30.20

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 30.20

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 30.20.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, In, 366 F. Supp. 3d 256 (D. P.R. 2019)

. . . Governing Law...363 30.17 Closing Case...363 30.18 Section Headings...364 30.19 Inconsistencies...364 30.20 . . . that under no circumstances shall the Confirmation Order modify the economic terms set forth herein. 30.20 . . .

IN RE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, In, 363 F. Supp. 3d 220 (D. P.R. 2019)

. . . Governing Law...326 30.17 Closing Case...326 30.18 Section Headings...326 30.19 Inconsistencies...326 30.20 . . . that under no circumstances shall the Confirmation Order modify the economic terms set forth herein. 30.20 . . .

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. A. ALY,, 320 F.R.D. 116 (S.D.N.Y. 2017)

. . . 392 (E.D.N.Y. 1998) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting 7 Moore’s Federal Practice—Civil § 30.20 . . . reduce any difficulty in identifying documents during the deposition.”); 7 Moore’s Federal Practice § 30.20 . . .

In NASSAU COUNTY STRIP SEARCH CASES, 12 F. Supp. 3d 485 (E.D.N.Y. 2014)

. . . Paralegal 15.70 70.00 1,099.00 GSAS LMG Paralegal 40.60 70.00 2,842.00 GSAS Kate Redburn Paralegal 30.20 . . .

EDWARDS, v. SUPERINTENDENT, SOUTHPORT C. F., 991 F. Supp. 2d 348 (E.D.N.Y. 2013)

. . . Criminal Procedure Law §§ 30.20, 30.30, and 210.20, the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. . . .

UNITED STATES v. W. PICKETT, III,, 505 F. App'x 838 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 30.20 bars the use of the TOP because the offset was not initiated within ten years after sentencing . . .

UNITED STATES v. W. PICKETT, III,, 505 F. App'x 838 (11th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 30.20 bars the use of the TOP because the offset was not initiated within ten years after sentencing . . .

HANCOCK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, v. RUHR, v. v. L. J. v. v. v. v. v. v. v., 487 F. App'x 189 (5th Cir. 2012)

. . . Amite, 49.05%; Claiborne, 56.17%; Copiah, 40.36%; Pike, 18.86%; Simpson, 26.70%; Warren, 52.74%; Wayne, 30.20% . . .

RACK ROOM SHOES, SKIZ LLC, v. UNITED STATES,, 856 F. Supp. 2d 1291 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2012)

. . . Subheading: 40.30: Of man-made fibers, Other, Other Heading: 6205: Men’s or boy’s shirts Subheading: 30.20 . . . 6205: Men’s or boy’s shirts shirts, and short-blouses Subheading: 40.30: Of man-made fi- Subheading: 30.20 . . . 6205: Men’s or boy’s shirts clothing accessories Subheading: 30.10: Of synthetic fibers, Subheading: 30.20 . . . Other_ 151 Heading: 6209: Babies’ garments and clothing accessories Subheading: 30.20: Of synthetic fibers . . .

J. KIPPLE, v. UNITED STATES,, 102 Fed. Cl. 773 (Fed. Cl. 2012)

. . . . § 30.20 to -.31 (2011) (establishing specific procedures for DOE administrative offsets via tax offset . . .

W. DEARSTYNE, v. MAZZUCA,, 48 F. Supp. 3d 222 (N.D.N.Y. 2011)

. . . that “both state and federal constitutional issues were considered at a hearing pursuant to CPL §§ 30.20 . . .

Co. Co. Co. v. L. P. Co., 34 Ct. Int'l Trade 1284 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2010)

. . . Plaintiffs complain that the lacquer prices in the WTA import data vary widely, depending on country, from 30.20 . . .

CHINA FIRST PENCIL CO. LTD. Co. Co. v. UNITED STATES, L. P. Co., 721 F. Supp. 2d 1369 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2010)

. . . Plaintiffs complain that the lacquer prices in the WTA import data vary widely, depending on country, from 30.20 . . .

COLE, v. P. ROPER,, 579 F. Supp. 2d 1246 (E.D. Mo. 2008)

. . . by a timely objection will be reviewed only for manifest injustice under the plain error rule, rule 30.20 . . .

T. CUMMINGS, v. BURGE,, 581 F. Supp. 2d 436 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . By contrast, Criminal Procedure Law Section 30.20 does embody the federal constitutional right to a speedy . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. SUPERINTENDENT, COLLINS CORRECTIONAL FACILITY,, 549 F. Supp. 2d 226 (N.D.N.Y. 2008)

. . . Law 30.30, like 30.20, is entitled ‘speedy trial,’ and in large part serves the same purposes, the history . . .

NEW MEDIUM TECHNOLOGIES LLC LLC, IP LLC v. BARCO N. V. LG LCD, L. L. C., 242 F.R.D. 460 (N.D. Ill. 2007)

. . . Moore, et al., Moore’s Federal Practice II 30.20[1][b][ii], p. 30-36 (3rd ed.2005). . . .

SMITH, v. M. MAHER,, 468 F. Supp. 2d 466 (W.D.N.Y. 2006)

. . . N.Y.2d 529, 535, 488 N.E.2d 1231, 1235, 498 N.Y.S.2d 119, 123 (N.Y.1985) (“Although CPL 30.30, like 30.20 . . . By contrast, Criminal Procedure Law Section 30.20 does embody the federal constitutional right to a speedy . . . Constitution and by Article I, Section 6 of the New York State Constitution, and embodied in C.P.L. § 30.20 . . . After reviewing New York’s case law and the statutory scheme set forth in C.P.L. § 30.20 and § 30.30, . . . case involving the abridgment of a defendant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial under C.P.L. § 30.20 . . .

FIELDS, v. ROPER,, 448 F. Supp. 2d 1113 (E.D. Mo. 2006)

. . . Pro. 30.20, which states that "plain errors affecting substantial rights may be considered in the discretion . . . Pro. 30.20; State v. Brown, 902 S.W.2d 278, 284 (Mo. banc 1995). . . .

GERSTEN, v. SENKOWSKI, L., 426 F.3d 588 (2d Cir. 2005)

. . . Law §§ 30.20-30, would toll speedy trial time while the victim was institutionalized. . . .

McDOUGAL- WILSON, v. GOODYEAR TIRE AND RUBBER COMPANY, d b a, 232 F.R.D. 246 (E.D.N.C. 2005)

. . . Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice, § 30.20[l][b][ii] (3d ed.2005) (collecting cases). . . .

SMITH v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK,, 388 F. Supp. 2d 179 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)

. . . . § 30.20 (McKinney 2003). (Eichenholtz Decl. Ex. I. at 3; Singer Dep. at 117-18.) . . .

I. OMEGBU, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,, 118 F. App'x 989 (7th Cir. 2004)

. . . . §§ 30.20-31, .33. . . .

ABRISCH, v. UNITED STATES v. v., 359 F. Supp. 2d 1214 (M.D. Fla. 2004)

. . . the time of Weidner’s approach, as announced in both Information November and Information Oscar, was 30.20 . . . The barometric was 30.20 in. Hg, the approximate altimeter setting at the time of the accident.” . . . The government’s only evidence that the plane’s altimeter was set at 30.20 is the NTSB statement quoted . . . “approximate” setting of the plane’s altimeter dial, or that the plane’s altimeter dial was set at 30.20 . . . enough ambiguity in the NTSB statement to discount it as “proof’ that the plane’s altimeter setting was 30.20 . . .

CLEMONS, v. LUEBBERS,, 381 F.3d 744 (8th Cir. 2004)

. . . Therefore, we decline to subject these claims to our discretionary review under Rule 30.20. . . .

RODRIGUEZ v. E. PATAKI T. v. E., 308 F. Supp. 2d 346 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)

. . . They find that the non-Hispanic black VAP would be 35.77%, the Hispanic VAP would be 30.20%; the Asian . . .

RAPP, E. v. CITY OF EASTON C. C., 77 F. App'x 88 (3d Cir. 2003)

. . . attorneys, the District Court reduced Williams’s hours from 37.60, to 16.90, Swartz’s hours from 53.20 to 30.20 . . .

DALLIO, v. L. SPITZER,, 343 F.3d 553 (2d Cir. 2003)

. . . See Mar. 30, 1994 Aff. in Support of Motion Pursuant to C.P.L. 210.20, 30.20 at 3, Exhibit B to Respondents . . .

WILLIAMS, v. KEMNA,, 311 F.3d 895 (8th Cir. 2002)

. . . R. 30.20; State v. Johnson, 968 S.W.2d 686, 691 (Mo. banc 1998). . . .

CARTER, v. BOWERSOX,, 265 F.3d 705 (8th Cir. 2001)

. . . Further, under Rule 30.20, [allegations of error that are not briefed or are not properly briefed on . . .

PAKISTAN NATIONAL SHIPPING CORPORATION, v. A CARGO OF M T OF HEAVY STEEL SCRAP, D, 159 F. Supp. 2d 942 (S.D. Tex. 2001)

. . . As the Regulation states, “every departing carrier transporting merchandise as specified in § 30.20 . . . .

HOWARD, v. J. LACY,, 58 F. Supp. 2d 157 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

. . . 2) the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds pursuant to CPL § 30.20 . . .

W. CHAMBERS, v. BOWERSOX,, 157 F.3d 560 (8th Cir. 1998)

. . . And under Rule 30.20, “[ajllegations of error that are not briefed or are not properly briefed on appeal . . .

TOKAR, v. BOWERSOX,, 1 F. Supp. 2d 986 (E.D. Mo. 1998)

. . . P. 30.20), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1031, 116 S.Ct. 679, 133 L.Ed.2d 527 (1995). . . .

BUZZEO, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION, HEMPSTEAD,, 178 F.R.D. 390 (E.D.N.Y. 1998)

. . . See 7 Moore’s Federal Practice, § 30.20[1][b][ii]; Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(1). . . .

R. LEISURE, v. BOWERSOX,, 990 F. Supp. 769 (E.D. Mo. 1998)

. . . Rule 30.20. The eighty-one prospective jurors comprised the venire panel in this case. . . . Rule 30.20. . . .

GIBRIANO, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,, 965 F. Supp. 489 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)

. . . embodiment of the constitutional guarantee to a speedy trial____ By contrast, Criminal Procedure Law § 30.20 . . .

E. REESE, v. DELO,, 94 F.3d 1177 (8th Cir. 1996)

. . . Mo.Sup.Ct.Rule 29.12(b); 30.20. . . .

POLLARD, v. DELO,, 28 F.3d 887 (8th Cir. 1994)

. . . Mo.S.Ct.R. 29.12(b) & 30.20. . . .

L. BOLDEN, Jr. v. EQUIFAX ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE SERVICES,, 838 F. Supp. 507 (D. Kan. 1993)

. . . . §§ 30.20 to 30.35. . . .

O. SIMMONS, v. C. THOMAS, M. J., 827 F. Supp. 397 (S.D. Miss. 1993)

. . . Interest Penalty (9-21-92) $ 361.94 $ 855.71 $ 102.48 1,320.13 8 3 5,052.87 3,222.94 763.77 9,038.68 30.20 . . .

J. BANNISTER, v. ARMONTROUT,, 807 F. Supp. 516 (W.D. Mo. 1991)

. . . Rule 30.20. . . .

JONES, v. F. CAVAZOS, A., 889 F.2d 1043 (11th Cir. 1989)

. . . . §§ 30.20 to 30.35 (1987). . . . Jones was sent a photocopy of the Department of Education rules and regulations (34 C.F.R. § 30.20 et . . .

C. GILMORE, v. ARMONTROUT, C. GILMORE, v. ARMONTROUT,, 861 F.2d 1061 (8th Cir. 1988)

. . . trial because the prosecutor’s statements constituted plain error under Missouri Supreme Court Rule 30.20 . . .

C. GILMORE, v. ARMONTROUT,, 681 F. Supp. 632 (W.D. Mo. 1988)

. . . Ct.R. 30.20. The Missouri courts advocate using the plain error rule sparingly. See, e.g., State v. . . . It is clear that petitioner’s “substantial right” to life has been affected under Rule 30.20. . . .

GARMONG, v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY,, 668 F. Supp. 1000 (S.D. Tex. 1987)

. . . amount of $26.35 incurred for medical records and for Montgomery County Sheriff’s Department records ($30.20 . . . Deposition of Joseph Garino 443.52 Medical Records 26.35 Montgomery County Sheriff’s Department Records 30.20 . . .

Jo JUGUM v. FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN INSURANCE CORPORATION,, 646 F. Supp. 764 (W.D. Wash. 1986)

. . . But in repealing RCW 30.20.-015, see Laws 1981, ch. 192, § 33, and in failing to reenact a similar provision . . .

E. VARNER, v. T. BARD, O. K., 622 F. Supp. 1518 (M.D. Pa. 1985)

. . . Varner’s employer ordering the attachment of Varner’s wages in the amount of $30.20 per week; $25 on . . .

GUMZ, v. MORRISSETTE, 772 F.2d 1395 (7th Cir. 1985)

. . . . § 30.20 (1979). . . . The basis for the arrest of Gumz and seizure of his property, Wis.Stat. § 30.20, see supra note 1, is . . . The relevant enforcement section of the Harbors and Navigation Chapter (in which § 30.20 is located), . . . Neither Wis.Stat. § 30.20(l)(b) nor Wis.Stat. § 30.03(3) authorized the seizure of Gumz’ property. . . . The statute in force at the time relevant to this action provided in pertinent part: 30.20 Removal of . . .

ORTHMANN, v. APPLE RIVER CAMPGROUND, INC., 757 F.2d 909 (7th Cir. 1985)

. . . . § 30.20. . . .

WHITTENBERG, Mr. P. NAACP, Dr. T. H. v. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF GREENVILLE COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA,, 607 F. Supp. 289 (D.S.C. 1985)

. . . 29.46 22.31 32.00 33.07 17.64 45.84 13.62 11.86 31.34 25.25 31.80 30.07 6.08 21.25 16.72 26.91 32.64 30.20 . . . 22.67 21.02 9.88 21.29 30.04 14.34 18.61 24.11 18.10 21.72 25.32 30.84 23.17 20.89 26.12 10.63 20.81 30.20 . . .

HULSH v. R. HULSH,, 431 So. 2d 658 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . 408, 88 So. 263 (1921); In re Estate of Wood, 226 So.2d 46 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Page On Wills, supra § 30.20 . . . See In re Roger’s Estate, 180 So.2d 167 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); Page On Wills, supra § 30.20 at 129. . . .

In THREE MILE ISLAND LITIGATION, 557 F. Supp. 96 (M.D. Pa. 1982)

. . . Keener Investigation & Research 30.20 The lodestar fee which the court authorizes is determined as follows . . . Keener 30.20 X 75.00 2,265.00 $52,386.75 Barry A. Roth Barry A. . . .

SMITH, v. WYRICK,, 538 F. Supp. 1017 (W.D. Mo. 1982)

. . . would apply would be a standard which would “inevitably closely track the standard set forth in Rule 30.20 . . .

WILLIAMS, v. DALSHEIM,, 480 F. Supp. 1049 (E.D.N.Y. 1979)

. . . speedy trial issue in terms of the Sixth Amendment right and the New York statutory counterpart, CPL § 30.20 . . .

FORAN, v. METZ,, 463 F. Supp. 1088 (S.D.N.Y. 1979)

. . . Petitioner’s Memorandum of Law, at 6 (Jan. 9, 1978); see N.Y.Crim.Proc.Law § 30.20 (McKinney Supp.1978 . . .

UNITED STATES v. LAI MING TANU,, 589 F.2d 82 (2d Cir. 1978)

. . . denied her right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment and under New York Criminal Procedure Law § 30.20 . . .

C. DUNN v. H. K. PORTER COMPANY, INC. ZECOSKI v. H. K. PORTER COMPANY, INC., 78 F.R.D. 50 (E.D. Pa. 1978)

. . . Soffian $ 60 30.20 $ 1812.00 Richard S. Hoffman $ 60 20.00 $ 1200.00 . . .

TRUST OF THREE, a v. CITY OF EMERYVILLE M., 430 F. Supp. 833 (N.D. Cal. 1977)

. . . adding Chapter 30, was passed by the City Council on April 27, 1964, and provides in part: “Section 30.20 . . .

TRANS OCEAN VAN SERVICE v. THE UNITED STATES, 200 Ct. Cl. 122 (Ct. Cl. 1972)

. . . the plaintiff is entitled to (1) a line-haul charge of $191.77 (based on the single-factor rate of $30.20 . . . defendant of $212.73, is entitled to (1) a line-haul charge of $191.77 based on the single-factor rate of $30.20 . . .

In TOWNSEND GROWTH FUND, INC., 245 F. Supp. 484 (S.D.N.Y. 1965)

. . . The Fund paid $30,197.51 for it, or $30.20 per share. . . .

UNITED STATES v. RUSSELL ELECTRIC CO., 250 F. Supp. 2 (S.D.N.Y. 1965)

. . . . $30.20 Universal Electric Company 23.43 A. C. . . . See 5 Wachtel and McBride, Government Contracts, §§ 30.10, 30.20, 33.60, 33.60 [2], 33.60 [3]. . . .

WOODS v. NATIONAL LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 347 F.2d 760 (3d Cir. 1965)

. . . Also see Moore’s Federal Practice (2nd ed.) 30.20. . . .

MARSHALL, v. B. LEAVEY,, 216 F. Supp. 615 (E.D. Tex. 1963)

. . . feel that the evidence would have supported a finding by the Deputy Commissioner of, say, $20.20, $30.20 . . .

R. HUGHES, v. W. PIERCE, J. a a, 141 So. 2d 280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)

. . . Appellant was told by Mason that the semi-annual premium on the policy would be $30.20 which the appellant . . .

CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO. v. ROGERS, 194 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1952)

. . . , which was subsequent to the effective date of Chapter 30 of the Louisiana Insurance Code, Section 30.20 . . .

ROGERS v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO., 95 F. Supp. 342 (W.D. La. 1951)

. . . Act No. 195 of 1948, § 30.20, LSA-RS 22:1420. . . . the rates on this particular policy were not approved prior to its issuance, as required by Section 30.20 . . .

SAMPSON MOTORS, v. UNITED STATES, 168 F.2d 878 (9th Cir. 1948)

. . . The amount so withheld left a balance due from the United States of $30.20, with interest, for which . . .

DACEY v. BETHLEHEM STEEL CO., 66 F. Supp. 161 (D. Mass. 1946)

. . . This varied in amount from $30.20 to $39.-26 in relation to the number of hours worked. . . .

v. W., 140 Fla. 471 (Fla. 1939)

. . . above electric fixtures of the amount of $546.00; that he paid freight and express in the amount of $30.20 . . .

UNITED STATES v. OREGON, 295 U.S. 701 (U.S. 1935)

. . . .; N. 89° W. 30.20 chs.; N. 66° W. 34.00 chs.; West 23.00 chs.; N. 42° W. 5.00 chs.; N. 71°30' W. 23.00 . . .

LOVERING v. UNITED STATES, 117 F. 565 (D. Mass. 1902)

. . . The sum of these charges is $30.20. 6. . . .

v. v., 51 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1850)

. . . Timber. 30.20 Small branch runs south. ■64.50 Prairie. 80.00 Timber poor. . . . Rolling prairie. 128th Mile. 30.20 Small branch runs southeast. . . .