JUAN PEREZ, A/K/A PEDRO HERNANDEZ, 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.
Juan Perez appealed his conviction for armed robbery and subsequent probation revocation. The appellate court affirmed the convictions and revocation order, finding that the trial court properly admitted evidence of flight and properly denied his motion to suppress photographic identifications.
The trial court properly admitted the evidence of flight. The trial court properly denied the motion to suppress the photographic identifications, as any weaknesses in the eyewitness identifications and photographic display went to the weight rather than admissibility of the evidence.
[1] Evidence of a defendant's flight upon the attempted apprehension by police is admissible.
[2] A photographic identification is admissible when the trial court finds, based on conflicting evidence, that police did not suggest to eyewitnesses that the suspect's phot…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the trial court properly admitted the challenged evidence showing that the defendant fled when the police attempted to apprehend him”
Establishes that evidence of flight is admissible in criminal trials
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePerez was convicted by jury verdict of armed robbery. He was subsequently convicted of burglary and grand theft, leading to revocation of his probatio…
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 Evidence Of Flight cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the defendant Juan Perez from (1) a judgment of conviction and sentence for armed robbery based on an adverse jury verdict entered below, and (2) an order revoking his probation based on the above armed robbery conviction and judgments of conviction and sentences thereafter entered for burglary and grand theft. The defendant raises two points which; we conclude, do not rise to the level of reversible error. We accordingly affirm.
First, we conclude that the trial court properly admitted the challenged evidence showing that the defendant fled when the police attempted to apprehend him. Bundy v. State, 455 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1984); cf. Merritt v. State, 523 So. 2d 573 (Fla.1988). Second, we conclude that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s pretrial motion to suppress the photographic identifications in this case. We think the trial court could have concluded, based on conflicting evidence adduced below, that the police did not tell either of the eyewitnesses herein prior to their identifications that a picture of the robbery suspect in this case was contained in the photographs shown to them by the police; moreover, the trial court could have further concluded that the defendant’s photograph, by virtue of its size, did not sufficiently stand out from the other photographs in the subject display so as to suggest that the defendant should be identified as the perpetrator of the robbery herein. The weaknesses in the eyewitness identifications and in the photographic display were argued to the jury, and, we think, such weaknesses went to the weight, not the admissibility, of the photographic identification. Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 93 S.Ct. 375, 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972); Grant v. State, 390 So. 2d 341, 343-44 (Fla.), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 913, 101 S.Ct.1987, 68 L.Ed.2d 303 (1980); State v. Billue, 497 So. 2d 712, 714-15 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Glas v. State, 329 So. 2d 341, 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); see also Zeigler v. State, 402 So. 2d 365, 374 (Fla.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 1035, 102 S.Ct. 1739, 72 L.Ed.2d 153 (1982); Baxter v. State, 355 So. 2d 1234, 1237-39 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 365 So. 2d 709 (Fla.1978).
The final judgments of conviction and sentences, as well as the probation revocation order under review are, in all respects,
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Escobar v. State, 699 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1997)…the consciousness of guilt which may be inferred from such circumstances.” Straight v. State, 397 So. 2d 903, 908 (Fla.) (citations omitted), cert. denied, Straight v. Florida, 454 U.S. 1022, 102 S.Ct. 556, 70 L.Ed.2d 418 (1981). See Perez v. State, 539 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (evidence that defendant fled when police attempted to apprehend him admissible). Here, the Escobars were willing to use deadly force to try to avoid arrest. This evidence is probative of defendant’s mental state and is, therefore…
-
State v. Escobar, 570 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…the consciousness of guilt which may be inferred from such circumstances.” Straight v. State, 397 So. 2d 903, 908 (Fla.) (citations omitted), cert. denied, Straight v. Florida, 454 U.S. 1022, 102 S.Ct. 556, 70 L.Ed.2d 418 (1981). See Perez v. State, 539 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (evidence that defendant fled when police attempted to apprehend him admissible). Here, the Escobars were willing to use deadly force to try to avoid arrest. This evidence is probative of defendants’ mental state and is, therefore…
-
Williams v. State, 545 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…DCA 1986); Dunn v. State, 492 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). “The weaknesses in the eyewitness identifications ... were argued to the jury, and ... such weaknesses went to the weight not the admissibility of the ... identification.” Perez v. State, 539 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Accordingly, we affirm Young's conviction. Next, we consider the trial court’s reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines. We vacate defendants’ sentences and remand for resentencing within the guidelines range. Skull v. D…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (U.S. 1972)
- Zeigler v. State, 402 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 1981)
- Grant v. State, 390 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 1980)
- Bundy v. State, 455 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1984)
- Delgado v. Israel, 451 U.S. 913 (U.S. 1981)
- Girardi v. Virginia, 451 U.S. 913 (U.S. 1981)
- Greene v. Grievance Comm. for the Ninth Jud. Dist., 455 U.S. 1035 (U.S. 1982)
- Merritt v. State, 523 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 1988)
- Baxter v. State, 355 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Glas v. State, 329 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)