ARTHUR REDFORD, 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.
The court held that admitting testimony of a false name given by an already arrested defendant was error, as was a jury instruction stating the false name as fact.
[1] Testimony that a defendant gave a false name at the time of arrest is inadmissible when the use of a false name has not been established during trial and bears no relevan…
[2] Evidence of a defendant's use of a false name is not admissible to show consciousness of guilt when the defendant was already under arrest and did not use the alias to av…
Previewing 2 of 4 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 convicted of trespass after the state elicited testimony that he gave police a false name at arrest and the court instructed the jury th…
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 Comment On Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
Arthur Redford appeals his conviction and sentence entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of trespass as a lesser included offense of burglary. He was acquitted of grand theft. Redford contends that the trial court erred in permitting the state to elicit testimony that he had given police a false name at the time of his arrest. In addition, Redford cites as error the trial court’s instruction to the jury. We find merit in his claims, and we reverse and remand for a new trial.
In Finlay v. State, 424 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), we held that the trial court erred in admitting testimony that defendant gave a false name when arrested. We found that the use of a false name had not been established during trial and, even if it had been proven, the use of a false name bore no relevance to the offenses charged. Redford’s case presents similar facts and requires the same disposition. Furthermore, Redford was already under arrest at the time he allegedly gave a false name. Thus, he did not use an alias for the purpose of avoiding arrest or prosecution, and the testimony was not admissible on that basis. Cf. Brown v. State, 391 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (evidence of defendant’s acts or statements calculated to defeat or avoid prosecution admissible as showing consciousness of guilt).
Next we turn to the challenged jury instruction. Redford claims error in the trial court’s instruction to the jury:
The defendant in this case gave the arresting officers a false name. This testimony may be used as evidence of a consciousness of guilt of the offense which had just been committed.
In the instruction the court stated as a fact that Redford had used a false name, a fact solely for the jury’s determination. The court’s instruction requires reversal because it incorrectly summarizes the evidence and because the instruction constituted prohibited comment upon the evidence. Whitfield v. State, 452 So. 2d 548 (Fla.1984); Jackson v. State, 435 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Simpson v. State, 562 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…Jackson the district court reversed and remanded for new trial because the trial court erroneously instructed the jury that it could consider evidence that defendant changed his identity as evidence of a consciousness of guilt. In Redford v. State, 477 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), citing Whitfield and Jackson, the district court reversed and remanded for new trial because the trial court instructed the jury that it may consider evidence that defendant gave police a false name as evidence of guilt. [*746] T…
-
Conley v. State, 592 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…for a prior, unrelated offense. Conley testified that he was wanted at the time of his arrest for violation of probation, which would constitute motivation for giving a false name. In such situation, the testimony is inadmissible. Redford v. State, 477 So. 2d 64, 65 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Finlay, 424 So. 2d at 969. Finally, I agree with the majority that the third and fourth instances of alleged prosecutorial misconduct were clearly improper, but when considered in combination with the errors discussed above…
-
Wilson v. State, 596 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…in holding that it was error for the trial court to instruct the jury that it could infer a consciousness of guilt if it found that the defendant was endeavoring to evade prosecution and arrest by making false statements. See also, Redford v. State, 477 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)(con-viction overturned where the trial court had given an instruction that the giving of a false name by the accused following his arrest could be used as evidence of a consciousness of guilt). We find, therefore, that the instru…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Whitfield v. State, 452 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 1984)
- Mervin Brown v. State, 391 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Finlay v. State, 424 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Jackson v. State, 435 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)