ANTHONY SIGMON, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Fundamental Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We review Sigmon v. State, 622 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993), based on a certified question. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.
We recently resolved this issue in Feller v. State, 637 So. 2d 911 (Fla.1994), where we found that a trial court does not commit fundamental error when it fails to make the findings required by section 92.53, Florida Statutes (1989), prior to allowing a child witness to testify by means of videotape. On authority of Feller we approve the decision under review. See also Hopkins v. State, 632 So. 2d 1372 (Fla.1994) (finding no fundamental error in failure to make findings required by section 92.54 before allowing child witness to testify by closed circuit television).
It is so ordered.
GRIMES, C.J., OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., and McDONALD, Senior Justice, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (20 total)
-
Freeman v. State, 761 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 2000)…m. Complaints about the State’s treatment of the physical evidence should have been raised on direct appeal; therefore, they are procedurally barred in collateral proceedings. See Hardwick v. Dugger, 648 So. 2d 100 (Fla.1994); Lambrix v. Singletary, 641 So. 2d 847 (Fla.1994); Bryan v. Dugger, 641 So. 2d 61 (Fla.1994). Moreover, defense counsel did argue this point to the jury. The issue was addressed in defense counsel’s opening argument, cross-examination of Detective DeWitt, and closing argument. Thus, the…1 / 3
-
Rodriguez v. State, 919 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 2005)…been preserved for appeal by either an objection at trial or by submitting an expansive jury instruction; and (2) that appellate counsel pursued the issue on direct appeal. See State v. Breedlove, 655 So. 2d 74, 76 (Fla.1995); Lambrix v. Singletary, 641 So. 2d 847, 848 (Fla.1994); James v. State, 615 So. 2d 668, 669 (Fla.1993). In the instant case, trial counsel failed to object to the instructions on this basis and appellate counsel did not pursue the claims on appeal. Therefore, any challenges to the substa…
-
Downs v. State, 740 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 1999)…ate review by objecting to the jury instructions on vagueness grounds or by submitting an alternative instruction and (2) that appellate counsel raised the issue on appeal. See State v. Breedlove, 655 So. 2d 74, 76 (Fla.1995); Lambrix v. Singletary, 641 So. 2d 847, 848 (Fla.1994); James v. State, 615 So. 2d 668, 669 (Fla.1993). Because defense counsel did not object to these instructions during trial16 or propose alternative instructions and did not challenge these claims on appeal, any challenges to the jury…
Previewing 3 of 20 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hopkins v. State, 632 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 1994)
- Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Jenkins, 637 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1994)
- Sigmon v. State, 622 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)