JEREMIAH JOHNSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court affirmed sexual battery convictions, holding that the trial court properly found child-victim's out-of-court statements reliable under section 90.803(23) and State v. Townsend, and that admission of such statements did not violate confrontation rights where the child testified at trial.
A trial court's findings of reliability for a child-victim's out-of-court statements describing sexual abuse are affirmed when supported by competent, substantial record evidence and analyzed against applicable statutory and case-law factors, and such admission does not violate confrontation rights when the child testifies at trial.
[1] A trial court's findings of reliability for a child-victim's out-of-court statements under section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes, are affirmed when supported by competent,…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJeremiah Johnson was convicted of sexual battery upon a child younger than twelve and lewd or lascivious molestation. The trial court admitted the chi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reliability Of Out-Of-Court Statements cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Jeremiah Johnson seeks review of his convictions for sexual battery upon a child younger than twelve and lewd or lascivious molestation. The only issue in this case is whether the trial court complied with the dictates of section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes (2007), and State v. Townsend, 635 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 1994), in determining the reliability of certain incriminating out-of-court statements by the child-victim.
For the State to use, at trial, evidence of a child-victim’s out-of-court statements describing sexual abuse, the trial court must find that the hearsay statements are reliable. See § 90.803(23)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (2007); Townsend, 635 So. 2d at 954. Here, the trial judge made ample findings of reliability, and we conclude that his findings are supported by competent, substantial record evidence. We further find that the judge analyzed the child’s statements in respect of each of the applicable factors listed in the statute and Townsend. As the child-victim testified at trial in this case, the trial judge was not required to consider whether the hearsay statements were supported by other corroborative evidence. See § 90.803(23)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (2007); Townsend, 635 So. 2d at 957-58.
In light of the trial judge’s supportable findings of reliability, we cannot conclude, under these circumstances, that the State’s use of evidence of the child’s incriminating hearsay statements amounted to an unconstitutional denial of appellant’s confrontation rights.
AFFIRMED.
KAHN, WEBSTER, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.