Case Citator › Delgado v. State

Delgado v. State

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Superseded by statute
Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Citation
776 So. 2d 233
Decided
Confirmed treatments
4
Flagged citations read
32 of 32
Citing cases (total)
32
Treatment dates
2001–2012
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. Delgado v. State was superseded by Florida's 2001 burglary legislation. Delgado held that a person who entered with consent did not commit burglary merely by committing a crime inside; remaining after entry had to be surreptitious.
More on how this was screened

The Legislature expressly nullified that rule for later conduct. Delgado still governs qualifying burglaries committed before February 1, 2000, whose cases were not final when Delgado was decided on August 24, 2000. The four confirmed statutory treatments are listed below. All 32 flagged citations have been read.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

32 later cases cite Delgado v. State; 32 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Delgado v. State?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Superseded by statute

  • The Legislature expressly nullified Delgado, but the change did not reach this earlier conduct.

    Schrack v. State · Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal · filed

    During the pendency of this appeal, the Legislature expressly nullified Delgado. See 2001 Fla. Sess. Law Serv. ch. 2001-58 (H.B. 953)(West)(to be codified at Fla. Stat. § 810.015). This nullification, however, operates retroactively to February 1, 2000. Id. Because the events herein occurred prior to that date, we do not discuss this enactment.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • Florida's amended burglary statute removed Delgado's surreptitious remaining requirement.

    Skellie v. State · Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal · filed

    The Florida Legislature expressly nullified the holding in Delgado. The legislature stated that in order for a burglary to occur, it is not necessary for the licensee or invitee to remain in the dwelling, structure, or conveyance surreptitiously. See § 810.015(1), Fla. Stat. (2002).
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • Florida's Supreme Court recognized that the legislation abrogated Delgado while preserving its application to certain earlier cases.

    Bradley v. State · Supreme Court of Florida · filed

    Shortly after the decision in Delgado, the Florida Legislature enacted legislation abrogating that decision, and clarifying that “for a burglary to occur, it is not necessary for the licensed or invited person to remain in the dwelling, structure or conveyance surreptitiously.”
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

  • The Legislature amended the burglary definition in direct response to Delgado, adding exceptions to the consent defense.

    Ducas v. State · Florida Third District Court of Appeal · filed

    This statute was amended in 2001 in response to Delgado v. State, 776 So.2d 233 (Fla.2000), wherein the Florida Supreme Court receded from several of its prior decisions which had found that the invitee/licensee affirmative defenses failed where the victim withdrew consent to remain on the premises, holding that these defenses, like the "open to the public” defense, was "a complete defense to the charge of burglary.” Id. at 236. In direct response to this decision, the Florida Legislature amended the definition of "burglary” to provide express exceptions to the invitee and licensee affirmative defenses.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Delgado v. State and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace