BILLY GENE BRANTLEY, 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 public defender's lien imposed without notice and opportunity to contest is invalid, and that prior unsworn, inconsistent statements can support a conviction if the trial testimony is not inconsistent with them.
[1] A public defender's lien cannot be imposed without providing the defendant notice of their right to a hearing to contest the amount.
[2] A prior inconsistent statement, admitted under section 90.801(2)(a) or section 90.803(23) of the Florida Statutes, cannot be the sole substantive evidence to sustain a co…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was convicted of capital sexual battery. The trial court imposed a public defender's lien and granted a judgment of acquittal on one count. …
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 Admissibility Of Prior Inconsistent Statements cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal from appellant’s convictions and sentences on two counts of capital sexual battery, appellant raises four issues. We affirm without discussion the first three issues, but as to the fourth issue we strike the public defender’s lien imposed on appellant. On the state’s cross-appeal, we reverse the trial court’s grant of judgment of acquittal as to Count III only.
The trial court erred in imposing a public defender’s lien without giving appellant notice of his right to a hearing to contest the amount. Murray v. State, 677 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Accordingly, we strike the lien. On remand, the court may reimpose the lien provided appellant is given notice and an opportunity to contest its amount. Malphurs v. State, 680 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
The trial court also erred in granting a judgment of acquittal on the capital sexual battery charge in Count III of the amended information. The law in this state is that prior unsworn, inconsistent, and uncorroborated statements cannot constitute the only substantive evidence to sustain a conviction “regardless of whether the prior inconsistent statement is admitted under section 90.801(2)(a) or section 90.803(23),” Florida Statutes. State v. Green, 667 So. 2d 756, 760 (Fla.1995); see Williams v. State, 560 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Jaggers v. State, 536 So. 2d 321, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Our review of the record reveals that the child victim’s testimony at trial in the instant case was not inconsistent with her hearsay statements admitted pursuant to section 90.803(23). The latter statements thus constitute competent evidence supporting the jury verdict. See Bell v. State, 569 So. 2d 1322, 1323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 581 So. 2d 1310 (Fla.1991). Accordingly, we reverse the court’s order of judgment of acquittal as to Count III only and remand for entry of judgment and imposition of sentence as to that count.
In all other respects we affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences and remand for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
MINER, ALLEN and MICKLE, 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)…ed, 474 U.S. 1073, 106 S.Ct. 834, 88 L.Ed.2d 805 (1986); 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 Jag…
-
Baugh v. State, 862 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…ally molested by Mr. Baugh had been so diminished by C.P.’s in-court testimony that “we could not have sufficient confidence in the criminal conviction to allow it to stand.” M.B., 701 So. 2d at 1162 (referring to Green). See also Brantley v. State, 692 So. 2d 282, 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (quoting Green, 667 So. 2d at 760, for the proposition that the “law in this state is that prior unsworn, inconsistent, and [*766] uncorroborated statements cannot constitute the only substantive evidence to sustain a convic…
-
Matke v. State, 765 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…ppellant notice of his right to a hearing to contest the amount, as is required under section 27.56(7), Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1). See Warren v. State, 701 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Brantley v. State, 692 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Brock v. State, 667 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Robinson v. State, 667 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Willis v. State, 665 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Such an error is considered fundamental. See Strickland v. State, 6…
Authorities Cited
- Jaggers v. State, 536 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)
- State v. Green, 667 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 1995)
- Williams v. State, 560 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Bell v. State, 569 So. 2d 1322 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Murray v. State, 677 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Rockwell Int'l & Travelers Indem. Co. v. Ayala, 680 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Malphurs v. State, 680 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)