L.E.W., A CHILD, 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 a defendant's confession cannot be admitted if the State fails to establish the corpus delicti, especially when the only evidence for corpus delicti is a victim's statement repudiated at trial.
A minor was charged with lewd assault. The State introduced the victim's out-of-court statement, which was later recanted, to establish the corpus del…
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 Substantive Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, Judge.
L.E.W., a minor, was charged with lewd assault upon a child, a second degree felony. At the adjudicatory hearing, the State examined the investigating officer who, over defense counsel’s objection, testified as to the content of a statement the victim gave during the investigation. This statement, recanted by the victim during the trial, tended to establish the corpus delicti and was admitted into evidence. Following the child-victim’s hearsay statement, the defendant’s “confession” was admitted. The State presented no other evidence that the lewd assault took place.
The defendant contends that the trial court erred in admitting his confession when the State failed to establish the corpus delicti. We agree and reverse.
It is the State’s burden to establish the corpus delicti (the proof that the act occurred and that someone’s criminality was involved) in order for any confession by the accused to be used against him. Burks v. State, 613 So. 2d 441 (Fla.1993). The only “evidence” which arguably could have established the corpus delicti in the case at bar was the victim’s hearsay statement to the investigating officer. We recognize that section 90.803(23), Florida Evidence Code, (the hearsay exception for statements of child abuse victims) generally permits admission of these statements. However, this evidence cannot be relied upon to establish the corpus delicti because this exception is subject to the broader evidentiary rule that statements repudiated at trial may not be used as substantive evidence that the act occurred. Such statements at most are useful only for impeachment, Jaggers v. State, 536 So. 2d 321, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). See also State v. Moore, 485 So. 2d 1279 (Fla.1986).
Because the State failed to present any substantive evidence to establish the corpus delicti, the admission of the defendant’s confession constituted reversible error. REVERSED.
DAUKSCH and THOMPSON, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bryant Williams v. State, 714 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…6); State v. Strauss, 119 Wash.2d 401, 832 P. 2d 78, 85-86 (1992); State v. Martinez, 150 Wis.2d 62, 440 N.W. 2d 783, 789 (1989). .In addition to Green, the defendant relies on Brantley v. State, 692 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); L.E.W. v. State, 616 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Ticknor v. State, 595 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Bell v. State, 569 So. 2d 1322 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Williams v. State, 560 So. 2d [*466] 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); and Jaggers v. State, 536 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). All…
-
Kleshinski v. State, 620 So. 2d 1303 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…ation because there was no testimony presented at trial to support a conviction on this charge. The victim specifically testified that the crime did not occur and the state presented no other evidence to support this conviction. See L.E.W. v. State, 616 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). Regarding his sentence, Kleshin-ski correctly contends that the guidelines scoresheet erroneously contains points for “victim injury” because no actual injury was inflicted in the offenses for which he was convicted. Subsequen…
-
Franklin v. State, 718 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…on was not the only evidence submitted by the state to prove that a crime was committed; thus, the confession was admissible as substantive evidence even though it was later recanted at trial. Furthermore, Mr. Franklin’s reliance on L.E.W. v. State, 616 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), and Santiago v. State,. 652 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), is misplaced because these cases stand for the proposition that a victim’s prior inconsistent statement that was recanted at trial cannot be submitted as substantive ev…
Authorities Cited
- Jaggers v. State, 536 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 485 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1986)
- Burks v. State, 613 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 1993)