SEE BAKER
v.
STATE

9th Cir. Ct. App. Div. | 2014-01-03
No. 2012-AP-42
1 FLCA 3244 Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, Appellate Division (2014)

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.

Synopsis

Appellant Latris Stanley appeals her convictions for Simple Battery and Disorderly Conduct, arguing the trial court improperly excluded evidence of the victim's violent reputation and prior acts of violence relevant to her self-defense claim. The appellate court affirms the convictions because the appellant failed to make a proper offer of proof for the excluded evidence.


Holding

The convictions are affirmed because the appellant failed to preserve the evidentiary issues for appeal by making a legally sufficient offer of proof as required by law.


Headnotes

[1] To preserve an issue for appeal regarding the exclusion of evidence, the party seeking to admit the evidence must make a legally sufficient offer of proof to the trial co…

[2] An appellate court will not speculate about the admissibility of excluded evidence or its potential effect on the outcome of the case.

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“To preserve an issue for appeal, the party seeking to admit the evidence must first make an offer of proof to the trial court specifically setting forth the contents of the excluded evidence.”

Establishes the procedural requirement for preserving evidentiary issues on appeal

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Latris Stanley was convicted by jury of Simple Battery and Disorderly Conduct. During trial, after the State rested its case in chief and appellant ha…

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.


Opinion of the Court

Before POWELL, MUNYON, DAVIS, J.J.

PER CURIAM.

FINAL ORDER AFFIRMING TRIAL COURT

Appellant Latris Stanley appeals her convictions for Simple Battery and Disorderly Conduct after a jury trial. She makes two arguments in this appeal: (1) that the trial court erred in excluding evidence of the victim’s violent reputation and prior specific acts of violence committed by the victim, and (2) that the trial court erred in limiting Appellant’s testimony regarding a prior recent altercation with the victim. She contends this evidence was admissible to support her defense of self-defense. To preserve an issue for appeal, the party seeking to admit the evidence must first make an offer of proof to the trial court specifically setting forth the contents of the excluded evidence. 2 of 2 This is because an appellate court will not speculate about its admissibility or what effect the excluded evidence would have had on the result. See Baker v. State, 71 So. 3d 802 (Fla. 2011).

After the State had rested its case in chief, and Appellant had called one witness in her case, her counsel at a recess raised the two issues by way of a procedure which, for want of a better term, we will call an “in-trial reverse motion in limine.” Thus it was her obligation to first make a legally sufficient offer of proof out of the presence of the jury. This could have been done either by calling the witness to the stand and asking questions, or by counsel making a verbal statement on the record stating who the witness or witnesses would be and specifically what their testimony would be, or by filing a written statement to that effect. Appellant’s counsel did none of these things, nor was the excluded evidence apparent from the context of the record.

Consequently, Appellant’s convictions are AFFIRMED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Orlando, Orange County, Florida, this 13th day of January, 2014.

/S/

ROM W. POWELL Presiding Senior Judge

MUNYON and DAVIS, J.J., concur. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing order was furnished on this 13th day of January, 2014, to the following by U.S. mail/ email: Molina Arena-Randall, Assistant Public Defender, [email protected], 435 N. Orange Avenue, Ste. 400, Orlando, Florida 3280; Dugald McMillan, Assistant State Attorney, [email protected], 415 N. Orange Ave., Orlando, Florida 32801; Honorable Kenneth A. Barlow, Jr., 425 N. Orange Ave., Orlando, Florida 32801.

/S/

Judicial Assistant


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw