CLARENCE SIMMONS, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed conviction and sentence, holding that prosecutor's comment on defendant's failure to call an alibi witness was proper because it responded to the alibi defense and the witness was within the defendant's control.
A prosecutor may comment on a defendant's failure to call an alibi witness when the defendant asserts an alibi defense, the witness is within the defendant's peculiar power to produce, and the witness's testimony would be potentially competent.
[1] A prosecutor may comment on a defendant's failure to call an alibi witness in response to an alibi defense when the witness is within the defendant's peculiar power to pr…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendant was arrested for robbery immediately after the crime occurred in the vicinity of the crime scene. At trial, defendant presented an alibi def…
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 Failure To Call Witnesses cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The final judgments of conviction and sentences under review are affirmed. We are unpersuaded that the trial court committed reversible error in allowing the prosecuting attorney to make certain comments to the jury, which comments are complained of in the sole point on appeal.
The defendant presented an alibi defense at trial through witness testimony and argument of counsel. The prosecutor responded to the defense, in closing argument to' the jury, by commenting on the defendant’s failure to call as a witness the person whom the defendant told the police he was going to meet at the time of his arrest for robbery — which arrest immediately followed the robbery and occurred in the immediate vicinity of the crime. Under these circumstances, we think the comment was entirely proper because (a) it was made in response to a defense of alibi asserted at trial by the defendant; (b) the witness was within the peculiar power of the defendant to produce as he was supposedly a friend of the defendant and (c) the witness’ testimony would have elucidated the transaction at hand and therefore constituted potentially competent testimony. The trial court committed no reversible error in overruling the defendant’s objection to this comment. See Buckrem v. State, 355 So. 2d 111 (Fla.1978); Romero v. State, 435 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), pet. for review denied, 447 So. 2d 888 (Fla.1984), and cases collected; Kindell v. State, 413 So. 2d 1283, 1287-88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (Pearson, J., concurring), and eases collected.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Martinez v. State, 478 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…489 F. 2d 193, 195 (6th Cir.1973). Such special relationships have been found where (1) the witness was defendant’s daughter, State v. Michaels, 454 So. 2d 560 (Fla.1984), (2) there was a friendship between the party and witness, Simmons v. State, 463 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), (3) the witness was the employer of the defendant, Milton v. United States, 110 F. 2d 556 (D.C.Cir.1940), (4) the witness was a police officer closely associated with the government in developing its case and had an interest in s…
-
Lawyer v. State, 627 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…f the defendant to the witnesses, they involved witnesses who were relatives or friends thus perhaps meeting the Jackson criteria: Hall v. State, 470 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (the uncalled witness was defendant’s girlfriend); Simmons v. State, 463 So. 2d 423, 424 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (the witness was a friend “within the peculiar power of the defendant to produce”); and Romero v. State, 435 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (defendant testified that at the time of the crime he was in the home of his girlfrie…
-
Young v. State, 598 So. 2d 163 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…tness at trial, an eyewitness to the altercation between the complainant and the defendant, namely, the complainant's friend named Austin. Martinez v. State, 478 So. 2d 871 (Fla.3d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 488 So. 2d 830 (Fla.1986); Simmons v. State, 463 So. 2d 423 (Fla.3d DCA 1985); Kindell v. State, 413 So. 2d 1283, 1288 (Fla.3d DCA 1982) (Daniel S. Pearson, J., concurring). Moreover, the state may not introduce testimony that the defendant has a reputation for violence in the community unless the defendant…
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
- Fla. Express, Inc. v. Hawkins, 355 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1977)
- Fidel Romero v. State, 435 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Kindell v. State, 413 So. 2d 1283 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)