LARRY ROBINSON, 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 Florida appellate court affirmed Robinson's convictions for aggravated battery and robbery with a deadly weapon, but reversed his habitual offender sentence because the trial court failed to make required statutory findings. The court found that although the trial court erred in admitting evidence of flight, the overwhelming evidence of guilt rendered this harmless error.
The trial court erred in admitting evidence of flight, but this constituted harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt given overwhelming evidence of guilt. The trial court properly refused to admit the out-of-state felony evidence and the habitual offender statute is constitutional. However, the sentence must be reversed because the trial court failed to make the required statutory findings under section 775.084(1)(a).
[1] Evidence of flight is inadmissible when objected to by the defendant.
[2] The erroneous admission of evidence of flight may constitute harmless error if overwhelming evidence of guilt exists.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“The trial court erred when it admitted, over appellant's objection, evidence of flight. See Merritt v. State, 523 So. 2d 573 (Fla.1988). The record, however, contains overwhelming evidence of appellant's guilt and, therefore, we hold the admission of this evidence constituted harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Establishes that while the flight evidence was improperly admitted, the conviction stands because overwhelming evidence demonstrates guilt.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobinson was convicted of aggravated battery and robbery with a deadly weapon. The trial court admitted evidence of Robinson's flight over his objecti…
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 Evidence Of Flight cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s conviction of aggravated battery and robbery with a deadly weapon.
The trial court erred when it admitted, over appellant’s objection, evidence of flight. See Merritt v. State, 523 So. 2d 573 (Fla.1988).
The record, however, contains overwhelming evidence of appellant’s guilt and, therefore, we hold the admission of this evidence constituted harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986).
We find no merit in appellant’s contention that the trial court erred when it refused to admit evidence of an out-of-state felony to impeach a prosecution witness. See Barber v. State, 413 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Johnson v. State, 449 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 1st DCA), petition for review denied, 458 So. 2d 274 (Fla.1984).
We also reject appellant’s argument that the habitual offender statute is unconstitutional. See Roberts v. State, 559 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA), cause dismissed, 564 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 1990); accord Johnson v. State, 564 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 288 (Fla.1991); Mitchell v. State, 575 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Crawley v. State, 578 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). The trial court, however, failed to make any of the required findings under the habitual offender statute. See § 775.-084(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1991).
Therefore, we reverse the sentence imposed and remand this cause to the trial court for resentencing. On remand, the trial court may again sentence appellant as an habitual felony offender upon making the predicate findings as required by section 775.084(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1991). See Rolle v. State, 586 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). The absence of any findings precludes the application of State v. Rucker, 613 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1993).
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED.
HERSEY and DELL, JJ., and DOWNEY, JAMES C., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Herrington v. State, 622 So. 2d 1339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…t failed to make findings of fact required by section 775.084(1)(a) 1 & 2, Florida Statutes (1991). We conclude that the court’s failure to make these findings is harmless error, and resolve a conflict between two of our opinions, Robinson v. State, 614 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 4th DCA1993), and Carbone v. State, 615 So. 2d 282, 285 (Fla. 4th DCA1993). Defendant, charged in 1989 with seventeen counts of burglary, petty theft, or grand theft, agreed to a plea in which he was sentenced to one year in jail and fifteen…
-
Aarry Tarver v. State, 617 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…urt to make any of the findings set forth at section 775.084(l)(a) was harmless error, and we affirm. Pursuant to Rule 9.030(a)(2)(A)(vi), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, we note that this decision apparently conflicts with Robinson v. State, 614 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), although the omission of the facts of that case from the opinion makes it difficult to determine whether an actual conflict exists. Affirmed. JOANOS, C.J., and BARFIELD and MICKLE, JJ., concur.…
-
Brown v. State, 626 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…eration of this section; and 4. A conviction of a felony or other qualified offense necessary to the operation of this section has not been set aside in any post-conviction proceeding. .Tarver acknowledged apparent conflict with Robinson v. State, 614 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 620 So. 2d 762 (Fla.1993).…
Authorities Cited (12 total)
- State v. DiGUILIO, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986)
- State v. Rucker, 613 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1993)
- Flowers v. State, 559 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Roberts v. State, 559 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Delrick Johnson v. State, 564 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Merritt v. State, 523 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 1988)
- Rolle v. State, 586 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Barber v. State, 413 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- Johnson v. State, 449 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Jones v. State, 575 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)