LARRY HOLCOMB, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1983-12-13
No. 82-863
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUB-BART and BASKIN, JJ.
443 So. 2d 185 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1983) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The judgments of conviction and sentences under review are affirmed upon a holding that the substance of the improperly admitted criminal convictions of the defendant herein had already been properly placed before the jury upon the state’s cross-examination of the defendant’s character witnesses herein. As such, we think the evidence error here was harmless under the circumstances of this case. Culberson v. State, 210 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968), cert. denied, 218 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 1968). §§ 59.041, 924.33, Fla.Stat. (1981); see also Cornelius v. State, 49 So. 2d 332 (Fla.1950); Sias v. State, 416 So. 2d 1213, 1217-18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), pet. for rev. den., 424 So. 2d 763 (Fla.1982).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Jones v. State, 465 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
    …ant specifically refused a curative jury instruction which the trial court offered to give. All things considered, we agree with the trial court that the testimony was, “perhaps unfortunate, but I do not think it was critical.” See Holcomb v. State, 443 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Taylor v. State, 289 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). Affirmed.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw