PAUL R. WHITE, APPELLANT,
v.
HARRY SINGLETARY, SEC. OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ETC., 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.
Paul R. White appeals his conviction for aggravated battery and assault on law enforcement officers, contending he was denied a fair trial through improper impeachment by the State. The court agrees and reverses, finding the State improperly impeached White's testimony regarding prior convictions by naming them in the jury's presence without introducing certified copies into the record.
The court held that the State erred both in failing to introduce certified copies of the defendant's prior convictions and in specifically naming those prior offenses in the jury's presence. The error was not harmless because the prior convictions were closely related to the charges at trial and the defendant's self-defense claim, making it impossible to say the jury would have convicted regardless of the improper impeachment.
[1] A prosecutor may not impeach a witness regarding prior felony convictions by naming the specific offenses without introducing certified copies of the convictions into evi…
[2] Improper impeachment of a defendant regarding prior convictions is not harmless error when the prior offenses are closely related to the charges for which the defendant i…
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 intelligence“the appropriate method for impeaching a witness who responds incorrectly to a question regarding prior convictions is to enter a certified copy of the witnesses's prior convictions into the record”
Establishes the controlling legal standard for proper impeachment of witnesses regarding prior convictions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn March 22, 1997, an incident occurred at the Metro-West Detention Center. White was charged in a two-count information with aggravated battery and a…
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 Improper Impeachment cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1055] PER CURIAM.
Paul R. White, the Defendant below, appeals his judgment of conviction and sentence. He contends that he was denied a fair trial through improper impeachment methods engaged in by the State during cross-examination. We agree, and thereby reverse and remand for a new trial.
The instant case arises out of an incident that occurred at the Metro-West Detention Center on March 22, 1997, out of which the Defendant was charged in a two-count information with aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer and aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. At trial, on cross-examination, the State asked the Defendant how many prior felony convictions he had. When the Defendant stated that he was unsure, the State asked whether he had three prior convictions for threatening a public servant, battery on a police officer, and resisting an officer with violence. In addition to making these statements, the State thereafter failed to introduce certified copies of the Defendant’s prior convictions.
It is well-settled, under numerous appellate decisions of this State, that the appropriate method for impeaching a witness who responds incorrectly to a question regarding prior convictions is to enter a certified copy of the witnesses’s prior convictions into the record. See e.g. Fulton v. State, 335 So. 2d 280 (Fla.1976); Porter v. State, 593 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Gavins v. State, 587 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Meyers v. State, 561 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Cummings v. State, 412 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Blasco v. State, 419 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Williams v. State, 511 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Rommell v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 394 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Even assuming the Defendant replied “incorrectly” regarding the number of prior convictions, the State properly concedes that it both erred in failing to introduce certified copies of the Defendant’s prior convictions, and in specifically naming those prior offenses in the jury’s presence.
However, we disagree with the State that such error was harmless. Harmless error exists when the proof of guilt against the Defendant is such that the jury would have found the Defendant guilty even absent the improper admission of evidence. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla.1986). In the instant case, the prior convictions to which the State referred were all closely related to the nature of the charges for which the Defendant was on trial. Upon consideration of the State’s improper impeachment methods on cross-examination, coupled with the fact that White’s defense was that he was acting in self-defense against the corrections officers, we cannot say that the error was harmless. We find no merit in the appellant’s remaining points.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rodriguez v. State, 761 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…erred by permitting the prosecutor to question Rodriguez about his prior convictions. See id. Rather, the prosecutor should have impeached Rodriguez by entering into the record certified copies of his prior convictions. See id.; White v. Singletary, 717 So. 2d 1054, 1055 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). Rodriguez’s trial attorney’s failure to object to this questioning fell below any standard of reasonable professional assistance, and there is a reasonable probability that the results of the trial would have been different…
Authorities Cited
- State v. DiGUILIO, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986)
- Fulton v. State, 335 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 1976)
- Lambert Keith Gavins v. State, 587 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Cummings v. State, 412 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Cochran v. Cochran, 412 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Williams v. State, 511 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Rommell v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 394 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Virgilio Blasco v. State, 419 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Leon v. OLD Republic Ins. Co., 561 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Porter v. State, 593 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)