GERARD MAINOR, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The court held that evidence of a prior collateral crime was admissible to establish context, identity, and intent, and even if inadmissible, the conviction was supported by overwhelming evidence.
Gerard Mainor was convicted of first-degree murder, sexual battery, and burglary. The appeal concerns the admission of evidence that the victim's moth…
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 Propensity Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After a jury trial, Gerard Mainor was found guilty of first degree murder [Count I], sexual battery [Count 2] and burglary [Count 3]. As to Count 1, he was sentenced to life imprisonment without becoming eligible for parole for twenty-five years; as to Count 2, fifteen years; and as to Count 3, life imprisonment, the terms to run consecutively. The issue presented on this appeal is whether the court erred in permitting evidence of a prior collateral crime.
The evidence which was objected to was the testimony of the victim’s mother that on the evening prior to the murder, she awoke to find the defendant in her home attempting to rape her daughter. The intruder was startled, ran out the door knocking the mother over, and exited the house. The two incidents were linked together by the mother’s identification of the defendant as the intruder on the previous evening, as well as an identification made by the victim after the first incident.
Evidence of other crimes is generally admissible if it is relevant for a purpose other than to show the bad character of the accused or his propensity to commit crime. In the present case, evidence of the prior crime is admissible to establish the entire context out of which the criminal conduct arose, Smith v. State, 365 So. 2d 704, 707 (Fla.1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 885, 100 S.Ct. 177, 62 L.Ed.2d 115 (1979); Ashley v. State, 265 So. 2d 685, 694 (Fla.1972); to establish identity, Shriner v. State, 386 So. 2d 525, 532 (Fla.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1103, 101 S.Ct. 899, 66 L.Ed.2d 829 (1981); and to establish intent, Ashley, supra, at 707.
Even if the evidence of the collateral crime was inadmissible, we would be compelled to affirm because of the overwhelming evidence against the defendant which included confessions to two different individuals. See Clark v. State, 378 So. 2d 1315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wilson v. State, 490 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)…k v. State, 378 So. 2d 1315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Bricker v. State, 462 So. 2d 556 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). In Clark the defendant fled from the police, and was caught concealing a bag of narcotics which he had been carrying. Similarly, in Mainor v. State, 415 So. 2d 827 [*1065] (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), on which the state relies in support of its harmless error argument, the evidence included confessions made by the defendant to two different individuals. See also McKinney v. State, 462 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Hol…
-
Sastre v. State, 487 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…n a review of the following authorities. Sireci v. State, 399 So. 2d 964 (Fla.1981); Williams v. State, 110 So. 2d 654 (Fla.1959); Adan v. State, 453 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Sarno v. State, 424 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Mainor v. State, 415 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Kujawa v. State, 405 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Russell v. State, 270 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). Defendant, Sastre, contends that the trial court erred in denying the request to produce the Cl’s current address. Producti…
-
Santana v. State, 438 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…74 L.Ed.2d 148 (1982); Steinhorst v. State, 412 So. 2d 332 (Fla.1982); Riley v. State, 366 So. 2d 19 (Fla.1978), cert. denied mem.,-U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 317, 74 L.Ed.2d 294 (1982); Jackson v. State, 419 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Mainor v. State, 415 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Hicks v. State, 414 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Monarca v. State, 412 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Fields v. State, 379 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Mahone v. State, 222 So. 2d 769 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- LeDuc v. Florida, 444 U.S. 885 (U.S. 1979)
- Ashley v. State, 265 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 1972)
- Massie v. Sumner, 449 U.S. 1103 (U.S. 1981)
- Smith v. State, 365 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 1978)
- Shriner v. State, 386 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 1980)
- Ojeda v. Louie Wainwright, 378 So. 2d 1315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)