DOUGLAS C. HAMILTON, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Paulo McBEAN v. State, 688 So. 2d 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
  …trial”). In contrast, where the impeachment testimony is noneritical and negative, it is properly excluded. E.g., Smith, 573 So. 2d at 313 (finding witness’s prior statements were not materially inconsistent with trial testimony); Jimenez v. State, 554 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (no error, in conviction for possession and sale of cocaine, in trial court’s denying defense opportunity to cross-examine police officer, who testified he observed defendant arrive at scene with silver box and exit with bag of ca…
• Varas v. State, 815 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
  …that the DEA agent’s trial testimony as to Varas’ nervous demeanor while being questioned about the contents of the bag was mere non-critical details and for this reason, we must affirm Varas’ conviction based upon our decision in Jimenez v. State, 554 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We do not agree that the DEA agent’s omitted statements constituted immaterial or non-critical details and for this reason Jimenez does not control here. In order to be convicted of the offense of trafficking in cocaine, four ele…
• Harper v. State, 677 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
  …kind of use of a police report which justifies breaching the normally protected police reports and investigative notes, reports and files. 284 So. 2d at 200. Thus, Johnson permits negative impeachment in limited circumstances. Cf. Jimenez v. State, 554 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (a non-critieal negative did not justify production of the police report). In sum, we conclude that it was not error for the trial court to permit impeachment upon a critical, negative omission from a police report as permitted b…

Authorities Cited

• RAY v. State, 403 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 1981)
• Wasko v. State, 505 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 1987)