MAURICE KEITH ROLLE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
MAURICE KEITH ROLLE, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
416 So. 2d 51
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1982)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
[*52] PER CURIAM.
A police officer testified at appellant’s trial that he placed appellant’s photograph in a photographic display for viewing by the alleged victim only after receiving certain undisclosed information from an undisclosed source. The victim then selected appellant’s photograph from the display. We believe the officer’s testimony constituted improper hearsay. Postell v. State, 398 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Molina v. State, 406 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). However we do not find a sufficient objection by appellant to preserve this error for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and HERSEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moore v. State, 418 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…l error, and even if it had been, an objection grounded solely on relevancy was insufficient to preserve the issue for review. The testimony was quite relevant. A proper objection to the testimony would have been that it was hearsay. Rolle v. State, 416 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). If a proper objection is not interposed at the time the evidence is presented, the appellant will be deemed to have waived his objection. United States v. Fox, 613 F. 2d 99 (5th Cir. 1980) (claim of error in not establishing pro…
-
Bennie Fulmore v. State, 483 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…harmful error. Unlike the fleeting reference in Barnes v. State, 470 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), this error was carved in stone on three separate occasions, depriving the accused of his constitutional right to confrontation. See Rolle v. State, 416 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Molina v. State, 406 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Postell v. State, 398 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Second, the trial court allowed Deputy Janson to testify as a rebuttal witness, notwithstanding the absence of his name fr…
-
Beatty v. State, 486 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…ineup after receiving undisclosed information from an undisclosed source. Appellant did not preserve this point for appellate review. However, on retrial, we direct the trial court’s attention to the observation made by this court in Rolle v. State, 416 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). We need not address appellant’s final point on appeal concerning the sufficiency of the evidence, since this case must be reversed and remanded for a new trial. REVERSED and REMANDED. ANSTEAD and WALDEN, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Postell v. State, 398 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Molina v. State, 406 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)