LUIS FERRADAS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1983-07-05
No. 82-1352
Before NESBITT, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.
434 So. 2d 24 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1983) Caution
Cited by 13 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The record contains competent evidence upon which a jury could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the sexual act between the victim and the defendant was nonconsensual. Further, the court’s exclusion of evidence that the victim had successfully escaped an attempted gang assault two years earlier was not an abuse of discretion. See Nelson v. State, 395 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (cross-examination must be shown to be relevant, and determination of relevancy is within the discretion of the trial court); Ray v. State, 262 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972) (trial court properly excluded immaterial matters from cross-examination).

Finally, the court properly allowed a physician from the Rape Treatment Center to testify, in response to a leading question, that the victim’s injuries were consistent with forced sexual intercourse. See § 90.-703, Fla.Stat. (1981) (testimony in form of opinion or inference is not objectionable because it includes an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (13 total)

  • State v. Townsend, 635 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 1994)
    …6, 98 L.Ed. 423 (1954); Ward (doctor’s testimony that child was having stomach aches, sleep disturbances, and acting dependent, was admissible to reflect basis for opinion that child suffered from post-traumatic stress syndrome); Fer-radas v. State, 434 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Even so, great care must be taken by a trial judge in determining what testimony of an expert is admissible because a jury often places great emphasis on the testimony of experts in this type of proceeding. Dirk Lorenzen, The Adm…
  • Kruse v. State, 483 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
    …ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact.1 The Third District has held that section 90.703 permits an expert to testify in a prosecution for rape that the victim’s injuries were consistent with forced sexual intercourse. Ferradas v. State, 434 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). In this case, the jury obviously had to decide the factual issue of whether the victim was actually subjected to a sexual assault, an issue similar to that involved in North and Ferradas. We also note that this view is not novel,…
  • Trees v. K-Mart Corp., 467 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
    …e similarity between the two events and after considering Ms. Trees’ proffered testimony that she had not suffered any ill effects from the first arrest. The determination of relevancy is within the discretion of the trial court. Ferradas v. State, 434 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Nelson v. State, 395 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Where a trial court has weighed probative value against prejudicial impact before reaching its decision to admit or exclude evidence, an appellate court will not overturn that…

Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw