PEGGY HUFF, 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 held that the trial judge erred in excluding third-party testimony relevant to the entrapment defense and in admitting irrelevant testimony about the defendant carrying a gun.
During a cocaine trafficking prosecution where the defendant claimed entrapment, the trial judge excluded testimony from a third party who had a simil…
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 Relevance Of Prior Bad Acts cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1144] LETTS, Judge.
During a prosecution for trafficking in cocaine, the defendant, who was claiming entrapment, sought to introduce testimony from a third party to the effect that that third party had likewise been approached in the same manner, in an unrelated drug transaction, by the same police informant. The trial judge denied the defendant's request, claiming that the third party’s testimony would not be relevant. We reverse.
The excluded testimony would have been relevant on the question of whether the police activity had as its end the interruption of a specific ongoing criminal activity and utilized a means reasonably tailored to apprehend those involved in the ongoing criminal activity. Cruz v. State, 465 So. 2d 516 (Fla.1985). It would be relevant on the issue of whether the informant caused the appellant to engage in the conduct by employing methods of persuasion which created a substantial risk that the crime would be committed by a person other than one who was ready to commit it. See § 777.201, Fla.Stat. (1987). Furthermore, the testimony should also have been admitted because it was relevant to show a common scheme or plan by the informant to instigate drug activity. See McCrae v. State, 395 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1980).
During closing argument, the prosecutor made it clear that, in his opinion, the defense was a fabrication. This is inappropriate. See Rosso v. State, 505 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), Waters v. State, 486 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), and Trinca v. State, 446 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
Finally, it was error to admit testimony that the defendant carried a gun to work. Guns had nothing to do with the crime charged. See Jackson v. State, 522 So. 2d 802 (Fla.1988).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ortiz v. State, 654 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…ds used. See 4 Weinstein, Evidence § 801(c)[01]; McCrae v. State, 395 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1041, 102 S.Ct. 583, 70 L.Ed.2d 486 (1981). We cannot find the exclusion of this testimony harmless in this case. See Huff v. State, 544 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Cruz v. State, 465 So. 2d 516 (Fla.), cert. denied, 473 U.S. 905, 105 S.Ct. 3527, 87 L.Ed.2d 652 (1985). This testimony was crucial to Ramos’ defense of entrapment. The jury should have had the benefit of hearing Orosco’s corro…
-
Tolbert v. State, 154 So. 3d 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…prejudice. Id. In this case, the State failed to establish any link between the handgun found in the [*1143] trash bag and the charged crime of trafficking; the evidence involving the gun was therefore irrelevant. See Green; see also Huff v. State, 544 So. 2d 1143, 1144 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (“[I]t was error to admit testimony that the defendant carried a gun to work. Guns had nothing to do with the crime charged” — trafficking in cocaine.). The State responds that everything found in the trash can with the coc…
Authorities Cited
- Cruz v. State, 465 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 1985)
- McCRAE v. State, 395 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1980)
- Jackson v. State, 522 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 1988)
- Rosso v. State, 505 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Hinton McClure Waters v. State, 486 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Trinca v. State, 446 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)