BOBBY DEAN MOORE, 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 trial court erred by admitting hearsay statements without making case-specific findings of reliability, thus denying the appellant due process.
The appellant was convicted of lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor. The trial court admitted hearsay statements from the victim to her mother and…
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 Right To Confront Accusers cases and more on FLexlaw
WOLF, J.
Moore challenges a final judgment and sentence based upon his conviction for lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor child. Appellant asserts that he was denied due process of law and the right to confront his accusers when the court allowed the state to introduce hearsay statements at trial without first making case-specific findings that the statements were made under circumstances that indicated they were reliable. We agree and reverse.
The trial court entered a written order pursuant to section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes (1993), allowing for admission of hearsay statements of the victim. The written order simply mirrors the language of the statute rather than making case-specific findings. Pursuant to this order, hearsay statements made by the victim to her mother and a member of the child protection team were admitted into evidence.
We hold (1) that appellant properly preserved the objection for appeal, Hopkins v. State, 632 So. 2d 1372 (Fla.1994); (2) that the trial court failed to make case-specific findings justifying admission of the hearsay statements, id. at 1377; and (3) we cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that the admission of the hearsay statements did not affect the verdict. Arney v. State, 652 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
JOANOS and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Griffith v. State, 723 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…rement of sections 90.803(23)(a) and (c), Florida Statutes (1997), that the court make a determination of the reliability of the hearsay statement and make specific findings. See State v. Townsend, 635 So. 2d 949, 957-958 (Fla.1994); Moore v. State, 658 So. 2d 600, 601 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (holding that trial court erred by failing to make case specific findings to justify admission of hearsay statement under § 90.803(23)). Without more, the mere finding that the counselor was an expert does not assure reliabi…
Authorities Cited
- Hopkins v. State, 632 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 1994)
- Arney v. State, 652 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)