JESSIE TILLMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1994-10-19
No. 93-1855
Per Curiam
643 So. 2d 1190 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1994) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court affirmed defendant's conviction, holding that police obtained voluntary consent for the home search and that standard jury instructions adequately addressed witness credibility concerns.


Holding

The trial court properly found voluntary consent for the search and did not err in refusing defendant's requested jury instructions on witness credibility.


Headnotes

[1] Trial court's finding of voluntary consent to search is upheld when the record contains evidence supporting that conclusion, even if conflicting testimony was presented b…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Jessie Tillman was convicted after police conducted a search of his home. The trial court found the police obtained voluntary consent for the search, …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Jessie Tillman appeals a judgment of convictions.

We affirm.

The record reveals testimony from which the trial court could properly conclude that the police obtained voluntary consent before conducting the search of defendant’s home. Denehy v. State, 400 So. 2d 1216 (Fla.1980). Although .that evidence conflicted with testimony presented by defendant, it was the duty of the factfinder to resolve that conflict. Tibbs v. State, 397 So. 2d 1120 (Fla.1981), aff'd, 457 U.S. 31, 102 S.Ct. 2211, 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982); Perez v. State, 536 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). In addition, the trial court did not err in refusing to give defendant’s requested instructions concerning testimony of witnesses who have plead guilty and witnesses who are co-conspirators.

The trial court gave Florida Standard Jury Instructions (Crim.) 14-15, 17. Those instructions direct the jury to consider whether each witness had been convicted of a crime or received favorable treatment in exchange for his testimony in determining the testimony’s reliability, and to use great caution in relying on an accomplice’s testimony against defendant. The standard jury instructions adequately cover the issues addressed in the requested instructions. See Davis v. State, 520 So. 2d 572 (Fla.1988); McGuire v. State, 639 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment under review.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Hechavarria-Sanchez v. State, 654 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Davis v. State, 594 So. 2d 264, 266 (Fla.1992); Balthazar v. State, 549 So. 2d 661 (Fla.1989); Tillman v. State, 643 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).…
  • Lindsey v. State, 671 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
    …ten sentencing form, because it fails to reflect the sentence orally pronounced as to Count III in Case No. 94-4597. Appellant’s convictions and sentences are otherwise affirmed. See Kyle v. State, 648 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Kidd v. State, 643 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). AFFIRMED, but REMANDED for correction of the written sentencing form. ERVIN, MINER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw