TONY JONES, 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.
Tony Jones appeals his conviction for six counts of sexual battery on his minor daughter, arguing that trial judge misconduct and admission of hearsay testimony denied him a fair trial. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, finding that the alleged judicial improprieties did not influence the outcome given the strength of evidence and that the hearsay was properly admitted under Florida's exception for child abuse statements.
The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the alleged judicial misconduct did not influence the outcome given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the hearsay testimony was properly admitted under Florida Statutes section 90.803(23) because the trial court properly determined the statements bore sufficient indicia of reliability.
[1] A trial court must make specific findings of fact on the record when admitting a child's hearsay statement under section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes.
[2] Failure to make specific factual findings regarding the reliability of a child's hearsay statement under section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes, constitutes reversible erro…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“in order to preserve for appellate review alleged improprieties of a trial judge, an objection must be made contemporaneously with the prejudicial conduct or comments”
Establishes the preservation requirement for judicial misconduct claims 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 intelligenceTony Jones was convicted of six counts of sexual battery on his minor daughter in violation of Florida Statutes section 794.011(2). The evidence inclu…
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 Trustworthiness Of Hearsay Statements cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Tony Jones, was convicted of six counts of sexual battery on his minor daughter in violation of section 794.011(2), Florida Statutes (1989). His main contentions as grounds for reversal are that he was denied a fair trial owing to (1) the trial judge’s repeated, demeaning comments about his attorney’s handling of the defense in the presence of the jury, and (2) the admission of hearsay testimony.
First, in order to preserve for appellate review alleged improprieties of a trial judge, an objection must be made contemporaneously with the prejudicial conduct or comments. Herzog v. State, 439 So. 2d 1372 (Fla.1983); Williams v. State, 305 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Mack v. State, 270 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972).
An examination of the record supports the State’s contention that the defendant did not make a contemporaneous objection to the alleged misconduct by the court sufficient to preserve the issue for appellate review. More importantly, the evidence against the defendant, in the form of an admission that he had repeatedly molested his seven-year-old daughter, and the substantial physical evidence of internal injuries to the child, establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the trial judge’s statements, considered collectively, did not influence the outcome of the trial. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla.1986).
Second, the hearsay evidence used to corroborate the in-court testimony of the child-victim of sexual abuse was properly admitted.
Pursuant to section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes (1989), the trial court conducted a side-bar hearing where it determined that the time, content, and circumstances of the hearsay statements established their trustworthiness. Because the defendant has not demonstrated that the trial court abused its discretion, the court’s findings that the statements bear sufficient indicia of reliability will be upheld. Perez v. State, 536 So. 2d 206 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 923, 109 S.Ct. 3253, 106 L.Ed.2d 599 (1989). Again, the record reflects that the defendant did not make a contemporaneous objection to the court’s findings sufficient to preserve the alleged error for appellate review. See Myles v. State, 582 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
For the aforementioned reasons, and because we find no merit in the defendant’s remaining issues on appeal, the convictions and sentences are affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hank Mathew v. State, 837 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…ounsel did make an objection, the objection was not that the judge was improperly demeaning counsel or Appellant in the presence of the jury or had abandoned his role of neutrality — the claim that Appellant makes in this appeal. See Jones v. State, 582 So. 2d 110, 111 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)(stating that “in order to preserve for appellate review alleged improprieties of a trial judge, an objection must be made contemporaneously with the prejudicial conduct or comments”); see also Pope v. Wainwright, 496 So. 2d 7…
-
Rollins v. State, 707 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…qui v. State, 699 So. 2d 1332, 1334 (Fla.1997), petition for cert. filed, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1337, — L.Ed.2d - (1998); Karp v. State, 698 So. 2d 577, 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Fruetel v. State, 638 So. 2d 966, 972 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Jones v. State, 582 So. 2d 110, 111 (Fla. 3d DCA), appeal dismissed, 592 So. 2d 681 (Fla.1991); Harris v. State, 564 So. 2d 1211, 1212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Griffin v. State, 502 So. 2d 1350, 1352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Scott v. State, 396 So. 2d 271, 271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Williams…
-
Gesner Pierre v. State, 597 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…ild-victim and conclude that such statements were properly admitted under Section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes (1989). See Perez v. State, 536 So. 2d 206 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 923, 109 S.Ct. 3253, 106 L.Ed.2d 599 (1989); Jones v. State, 582 So. 2d 110, 111 (Fla. 3d DCA), dismissed, 592 So. 2d 681 (Fla.1991); Myles v. State, 582 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA), juris, accepted, 591 So. 2d 631 (Fla.1991). Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. DiGUILIO, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986)
- Perez v. State, 536 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 1988)
- Fredrick Herzog v. State, 439 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 1983)
- Williamson v. Buckingham, 492 U.S. 923 (U.S. 1989)
- Corbit v. Denley, 492 U.S. 923 (U.S. 1989)
- Myles v. State, 582 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Mack v. State, 270 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Williams v. State, 305 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)