JASON W. NEWELL, 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 did not err in admitting testimony about a prior incident and that the defendant waived the objection to the jury instructions.
Newell was convicted of lewd and lascivious assault upon a child. He appealed, arguing the court erred in admitting testimony about a prior incident 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 Lewd And Lascivious Assault Upon A Child cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, J.
Newell was convicted of lewd and lascivious assault upon a child and appeals. We affirm.
First, Newell contends the court erred in permitting the victim to testify that she saw him naked from the waist down on an occasion prior to the assault. This incident became relevant when New-ell urged that the inmate who testified that Newell had confessed to the crime had discovered that the victim had walked in on Newell while he was masturbating only from the discovery material that the inmate had improperly found in Newell’s cell in Newell’s absence. Since there was evidence that the cells were locked when the inmates were out of their cells, this evidence became relevant to corroborate the purported confession challenged by New-ell.
Newell also challenges the court’s failure to give the lesser included instruction on unnatural and lascivious act. This objection was waived when the defense stated it had no objections to the instructions as given by the court.
AFFIRMED.
THOMPSON, C.J., and PLEUS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Peede v. State, 955 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 2007)…kill them.” See Thompson v. State, 565 So. 2d 1311, 1315 (Fla.1990) (finding that admitted photographs were relevant to show that the defendant’s out-of-court confessions were consistent with the evidence found at the crime scene); Newell v. State, 772 So. 2d 597, 598 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (holding that “evidence became relevant to corroborate the purported confession”). We find merit in the State’s contentions. While Peede argues that the prosecutor needlessly relied on the uncharged attempted murders of Ger…