Cases from cite.case.law:

PATTERSON, v. STATE, 264 So. 3d 315 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Patterson states in his initial brief that he wants the documents pursuant to section 940.04, Florida . . . Patterson never mentioned section 940.04 in the postconviction court. See Steinhorst v. . . . Moreover, section 940.04 is not applicable because Mr. . . . See § 940.04 (providing that any applicant for executive clemency is entitled to certified copies of . . .

A. FALANA, v. STATE, 210 So. 3d 186 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 940.04, Fla. Stat. (2015); see Clayton v. State, 849 So.2d 461, 461 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). . . . prejudice to Falana’s right to file his request for documents with the clerk of court under section 940.04 . . .

D. DENSON, Jr. v. STATE, 198 So. 3d 779 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Section 940.04, Florida Statutes (2015), provides that “[i]n the event any applicant for executive clemency . . . sought arrest warrants and docket reports, but those documents are not within the purview of section 940.04 . . . See § 940.04. On remand, Mr. . . .

RAMSEY, v. FULLER,, 99 So. 3d 628 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Petitioner claims a right to documents under section 940.04, Florida Statutes, which requires a clerk . . . a copy of (a) the docketing statement and (b) the information in his criminal case, citing section 940.04 . . . executive clemency process and taken the necessary first steps to entitle him to copies under section 940.04 . . . As such, the inmate was entitled to copies under section 940.04 so that she could file her completed . . . Instead, he has merely cited section 940.04 and claimed a right to certified copies, which is wholly . . .

ADLINGTON, v. STATE, 948 So. 2d 839 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . of the circuit court if appropriate, for failure to comply with its ministerial duties under Section 940.04 . . .

WILLIAMS, v. CIRCUIT COURT, JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,, 862 So. 2d 887 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . He complains that he is entitled to free copies of these documents under section 940.04, Florida Statutes . . . Section 940.04, Florida Statutes, does entitle an applicant for executive clemency to free certified . . .

CLAYTON, v. STATE, 849 So. 2d 461 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Code R. 27 app. (2002); § 940.04, Fla. Stat. (2002); Marshall v. . . . See § 940.04; Lane, 778 So.2d at 1071 n. 1. . . . Pursuant to section 940.04, the clerk of the court shall furnish the copies to the applicant free of . . . trial court to compel the clerk of the court to comply with his ministerial duty set forth in section 940.04 . . .

LANE, v. GARDNER,, 778 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Section 940.04, Florida Statutes, provides a basis for his request. . . . Section 940.04, Florida Statutes, does not require the production of this document nor do we. . . . .

MARSHALL, v. STATE, 759 So. 2d 717 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Chapter 940.04, Florida Statutes (1999), states: In the event any applicant for executive clemency is . . .

MEISNER, v. PATTON ELECTRIC CO. INC., 781 F. Supp. 1432 (D. Neb. 1990)

. . . Schaub, less the above noted deductions, the damages to real property are $113,-940.04. . . .

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS, v. PORT OF TACOMA,, 525 F. Supp. 65 (W.D. Wash. 1981)

. . . line described as: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Section 3; thence N. 89° 42' 32" W., 940.04 . . .

HAYZES, v. ISRAEL,, 478 F. Supp. 846 (E.D. Wis. 1979)

. . . Stats., of homicide by reckless use of a weapon, § 940.04(1), Wis.Stats., and of negligent use of a weapon . . .

LARKIN, v. E. McCANN,, 368 F. Supp. 1352 (E.D. Wis. 1974)

. . . The amended complaint asserted that “Sec. 940.04, Wis.Stats, [the criminal abortion statute] has been . . .

ROE v. WADE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF DALLAS COUNTY, 410 U.S. 113 (U.S. 1973)

. . . . § 940.04 (1969); Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 6-77, 6-78 (1957). . . . Stat. § 940.04 (6) (1969), and the new Connecticut statute, Pub. . . .

LARKIN, v. BRUCE,, 352 F. Supp. 1076 (E.D. Wis. 1972)

. . . openly, publicly, repeatedly, persistently and intentionally violating a public statute, namely sections 940.04 . . . Section 940.04 is Wisconsin’s abortion statute. . . . Rather, he is relying on the fact that §§ 940.04(1) and (5), the subsections which cover abortions of . . .

STATE BRUCE v. LARKIN,, 346 F. Supp. 1065 (E.D. Wis. 1972)

. . . in the state court alleging that the defendant is performing abortions in open violation of section 940.04 . . .

ABELE v. MARKLE, s, 342 F. Supp. 800 (D. Conn. 1972)

. . . . § 940.04, which punishes one who “destroys the life of an unborn child.” . . .

L. KENNAN, M. D. v. WARREN,, 328 F. Supp. 525 (W.D. Wis. 1971)

. . . Kennan has repeatedly violated Sections 940.04(1) and 448.18(1) (a), Wis.Stat., and in which judgment . . . Kennan under Section 940.04(1), Wis. Stat. . . . Kennan, alleging violations of Section 940.04(1). . . . My April 27 opinion related strictly to Section 940.04(JL) and (5), Wis. Stat. . . . The order actually reads “940.04(3) (c),” but this is clearly a typographical error. . . . .

L. KENNAN, M. D. v. C. NICHOL,, 326 F. Supp. 613 (W.D. Wis. 1971)

. . . Plaintiffs attack Sections 940.04(1) and (5) of the Wisconsin Statutes, contending that they violate . . . Section 940.04(5) excepts from the prohibition a “therapeutic abortion,” which it defines. . . . April 19 and 20, the defendant made public statements threatening their imminent arrest under Section 940.04 . . . causing to be filed in a state court criminal complaints against them alleging violations of Section 940.04 . . . district attorney to show cause on April 26 why he should not be restrained from enforcing Section 940.04 . . . , assistants, and all those acting in concert or cooperation with him to enforce Wisconsin Statutes 940.04 . . .

HARLING, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES,, 323 F. Supp. 899 (E.D. Wis. 1971)

. . . convicted by a state court on November 14, 1968, of the commission of an abortion in violation of § 940.04 . . . prosecution for the commission of an allegedly illegal abortion, a three-judge district court declared that § 940.04 . . . the time of the Babbitz decision did the petitioner raise the question of the constitutionality of § 940.04 . . . The declaration in Babbitz that § 940.04(1) and (5) are unconstitutional was based upon the premise that . . .

E. McCANN, v. KERNER, W. L. G. F. Jr., 436 F.2d 1342 (7th Cir. 1971)

. . . district court entered a judgment reading in relevant part: It is ordered and adjudged that Sections 940.04 . . . court entered an amended judgment reading in relevant part: It is ordered and adjudged that Sections 940.04 . . .

G. BABBITZ, M. D. v. E. McCANN, F. Jr., 320 F. Supp. 219 (E.D. Wis. 1970)

. . . hearing, arguments were heard on the question of our enjoining the defendants from prosecuting under §§ 940.04 . . . Babbitz and also permanently enjoining the defendants from henceforth prosecuting others under §§ 940.04 . . .

I. I. ROSEN, M. D. v. LOUISIANA STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS,, 318 F. Supp. 1217 (E.D. La. 1970)

. . . . § 940.04 : “(1) Any person, other than the mother, who intentionally destroys the life of an unborn . . .

G. BABBITZ, M. D. v. E. McCANN, F. Jr., 310 F. Supp. 293 (E.D. Wis. 1970)

. . . . § 940.04 and a judgment declaring it unconstitutional. . . . district attorney of Milwaukee county for allegedly having performed an abortion in violation of § 940.04 . . . We believe that § 940.04(5) sets forth with reasonable clarity and sufficient particularity the kind . . . amendment compels our conclusion that the state of Wisconsin may not, in the manner set forth in § 940.04 . . . CONCLUSION The plaintiff is entitled to a declaratory judgment declaring § 940.04(1) and (5) violative . . .

G. BABBITZ, M. D. v. E. McCANN, F. Jr., 306 F. Supp. 400 (E.D. Wis. 1969)

. . . action in which the plaintiff attacks the validity, under the Constitution of the United States, of § 940.04 . . . of the Wisconsin Statutes, and seeks a judgment declaring that § 940.04 violates the Constitution of . . . United States, and further seeks an injunction restraining the defendants from enforcing or executing § 940.04 . . . Milwaukee County, presided over by the defendant judge, for performing an abortion in violation of § 940.04 . . . The plaintiff is not only being threatened but is in fact being prosecuted for the violation of § 940.04 . . .

SHANNON, v. STATE, 172 So. 2d 479 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)

. . . . §§ 906.28 and 940.04, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. . . .