LAURIE ELAINE MCCARTHY, 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.
The court affirmed the conviction, finding no prejudice to the defendant despite concerns about jury deliberation tapes.
The defendant challenged the submission of a tape recording of jury instructions to the jury for deliberation. The trial court allowed the tape to be …
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 Jury Deliberations cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
This is another case which challenges the propriety of submitting a tape recording of jury instructions to the jury for consideration during deliberation. Although we previously have expressed our concern about the problems attendant upon this practice, we have declined to reverse where no prejudice has been shown to result. Powell v. State, 443 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Fayson v. State, 442 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); DeWitt v. State, 442 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
In a more recent case, Woodring v. State, 448 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), we reversed when the trial judge, upon the jury’s request for reinstruction, declined to verbally reinstruct and, instead, attempted to rely upon the jury’s ability to find the relevant instructions on the tape. We determined this procedure to be violative of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.410, and prejudicial to the defendant.
The instant case does not reveal prejudice to the defendant. Despite our previously expressed concerns, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
ORFINGER, C.J., and SHARP, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crawley v. State, 455 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See McCarthy v. State, 446 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Powell v. State, 443 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Fayson v. State, 442 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Dewitt v. State, 442 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). Cf. Woodring v. State, 448 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). COBB,…
-
Draves v. State, 459 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…oth are without merit. First, this court has ruled in four separate cases that while sending the jury tape recorded instructions is a practice to be discouraged, it is not reversible error in the absence of a showing of prejudice. McCarthy v. State, 446 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Powell v. State, 443 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Fayson v. State, 442 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); DeWitt v. State, 442 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). This appellant has made no showing of prejudice. Second, the appel…
-
Harmon v. State, 448 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…out any damaging or prejudicial material legible beneath the blackened-out portions of these instructions.2 Therefore, we AFFIRM. COBB and FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., JJ., concur. . §§ 777.04, 812.13(2)(c), Fla.Stat. (1981). . Cf. McCarthy v. State, 446 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Dewitt v. State, 442 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).…
Authorities Cited
- Fayson v. State, 442 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Solomon v. State, 442 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Wallace v. Sears, 442 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Dewitt v. State, 442 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Woodring v. State, 448 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- McGILL v. State, 443 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- Ira Lee Powell v. State, 443 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)