DARRELL C. THOMPSON, 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 officer's testimony regarding the victim's prior consistent statement was harmless error, but the minimum mandatory sentence for false imprisonment was improper.
Defendant was convicted of aggravated battery, aggravated assault, and false imprisonment. An investigating officer testified about the victim's prior…
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 Invited Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Darrell C. Thompson appeals his judgment and sentences for aggravated battery, aggravated assault, and false imprisonment. We affirm each of those convictions and sentences except that portion of the sentence for false imprisonment which requires a three-year minimum mandatory period of incarceration.
Mr. Thompson argues that an investigating officer was erroneously permitted to testify concerning the victim’s prior consistent statement about the defendant’s use of a handgun during the commission of the offenses. See Perez v. State, 371 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Unlike the defendant in Perez, however, Mr. Thompson has waived any challenge to the harmfulness of this hearsay. Defense counsel made a general hearsay objection to the entire statement made by the victim to the police officer. Portions of that statement were admissible as exceptions to the hearsay rule. No attempt was made to limit the objection to the inadmissible portions of the statement. Moreover, defense counsel had first raised the issue of the victim’s description of the handgun to the police during his cross-examination of the victim. The subsequent testimony of the police officer, merely confirming the testimony earlier elicited by the defense, was invited by the cross-examination and harmless under these circumstances.
The three-year minimum mandatory sentence is proper on the convictions for aggravated battery and aggravated assault. The portion of the sentence for false imprisonment requiring a three-year minimum mandatory sentence, however, must be stricken because false imprisonment is not one of the offenses enumerated in section 775.087(2)(a)(l), Florida Statutes (1989).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ross v. State, 199 So. 3d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Thompson v. State, 589 So. 2d 1013, 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). TAYLOR, GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.…
-
Aranjo v. State, 718 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…ood test. This condition has no relation to the charge to which Aranjo pled. Thus, the condition of probation cannot be sustained. See Biller v. State, 618 So. 2d 734 (Fla.1993); James v. State, 696 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Thompson v. State, 589 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Coleman v. State, 496 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). AFFIRMED in part; Condition of Probation STRICKEN. COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.…
-
Alonso Valencia v. State, 937 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…McIntosh objected specifically to the two weapons unconnected to the crime. See Cannady v. State, 620 So. 2d 165 (Fla.1993)(general objection to four potential jurors does not preserve issue of qualifications of any one of them); Thompson v. State, 589 So. 2d 1013, 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)(general hearsay objection to victim's entire statement does not preserve issue when "[p]ortions of that statement were admissible as exceptions to the hearsay rule [and][n]o attempt was made to limit the objection to the ina…
Authorities Cited
- Perez v. State, 371 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)