DENNIS LEE BAXTER, 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 conviction for drug possession and sale, holding that trial court properly allowed jury to take tape recording of telephone conversation into deliberation room under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.400(d).
Trial court did not err in permitting the jury to take a tape recording of a telephone conversation into the deliberation room during jury deliberations.
[1] Fla.R.Crim.P. …
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 intelligenceBaxter was convicted of possession and sale of hydromorphone. During jury deliberations, the jury requested to have a tape recording of a telephone co…
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 Rules Of Criminal Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Judge.
Appellant Dennis Lee Baxter appeals the judgment and sentence entered against him for possession and sale of hydromorphone in violation of Section 893.13, Florida Statutes. He argues that the trial court erred in sending a tape recorder and recording of a telephone conversation between himself and a witness into the jury room during deliberations. The tape recording had previously been admitted into evidence and played for the jury in open court. During deliberations, the jury returned to the court to ask to have the tape recording replayed. Defense counsel’s objection was overruled and the recording was sent to the jury room. We cannot agree with appellant’s argument that this action constituted reversible error and, therefore, affirm the judgment and sentence imposed against him.
Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.400(d) permits all things received into evidence, other than depositions, to be taken into the jury room during deliberations. As appellee pointed out, the committee notes to this rule in Florida Statutes Annotated reveal that the committee recommended altering the prior Section 919.04(3), Florida Statutes (1965), to exclude written or recorded statements or confessions from that evidence which would be allowed in the jury room during deliberations. However, the notes clearly point out that this proposal was not approved. Therefore, the prior rule was transferred unchanged and remains in effect today.
GRIMES, C. J., and DANAHY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Herrera v. State, 532 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…eter translating the Spanish segments. Accordingly, appellant may not complain of the very situation he created at trial. White v. State, 446 So. 2d 1031, 1036 (Fla.1984); see Crews v. State, 442 So. 2d 432, 434 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Baxter v. State, 375 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 383 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1980); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.400. Appellant also argues that Detective Dygon’s testimony at trial repeating statements made by Herrera during the drug purchase and translated by Arce was inadmissibl…
-
N.U., Inc. v. T & R Seafood, Inc., 428 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Roberts v. Askew, 260 So. 2d 492 (Fla.1972); Brinker v. Ludlow, 379 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Schade v. Brown, 375 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Golub v. Golub, 336 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).…
-
Ivory Wilcox and Ana Lee Wilcox v. Hotelerama Assocs., Ltd., 619 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…(Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Florida courts also have the authority to require prepayment of costs in involuntarily dismissed cases based upon failure to obey court orders on discovery pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.380. See Schade v. Brown, 375 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). However, these legal doctrines apply to cases involving a different phase of the legal proceedings, and different procedural postures. None of these cases involved the situation where the trial court was under a direct mandate fr…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence