TONY MILLER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Demonstrative Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse defendant’s convictions and hold that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to display his tattooed arms and lack of a thumb to the jury. Smith v. State, 574 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), aff'd on other grounds, sub nom. State v. Washington, 594 So. 2d 291 (Fla.1992); United States v. Bay, 762 F. 2d 1314 (9th Cir.1984). Defense counsel advised the court that she was prepared to offer the testimony of family members to the effect that defendant had the tattoos on the date of the incidents charged in the information. This would have been an adequate predicate for the display defendant requested. Whittington v. State, 656 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Kulick v. State, 614 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Pettit v. State, 612 So. 2d 1381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). On remand, if defendant establishes that he had the tattoos on the dates in question, the trial court should grant a new trial. Whittington; Pettit.
Remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Boyd v. State, 749 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…sion of alcohol, or associating with persons who consume alcohol, or frequenting places where alcohol is the main source of business. Those prohibitions are unrelated to the offense of solicitation or delivery of cocaine. See Gerstenberger v. State, 667 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Richardson v. State, 620 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Therefore, we strike the alcohol portions of the condition. Condition 20 requires Boyd to submit to and pay for an evaluation to deter [*537] mine whether he has a treatab…
-
Ramirez v. State, 847 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…tion had been well taken. “It is incumbent upon the defense to make a showing, through appropriate witnesses, that the tattoos were present at the time of the crime.” Kulick v. State, 614 So. 2d 672, 673 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); see also Miller v. State, 667 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Out of the presence of the jury, the court ruled that the State would be allowed to comment in closing argument regarding the absence of a predicate showing that the defendant had the tattoos on the date of the charged crime. Th…
Authorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 574 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Brunetti v. State, 594 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1992)
- United States v. Thaeeb BAY, 748 F.2d 1344 (9th Cir. 1984)
- Pettit v. State, 612 So. 2d 1381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Whittington v. State, 656 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Kulick v. State, 614 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)