C.W., A CHILD, 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.
C.W., a juvenile, appealed his conviction and sentence, challenging the trial judge's denial of a motion to recuse based on the judge's pre-trial review of a probable cause affidavit containing hearsay statements. The appellate court affirmed, holding that judges are presumed to disregard inadmissible evidence and are better positioned than juries to set aside such evidence.
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding no error or abuse of discretion. The court held that when a judge, sitting as trier of fact, reviews inadmissible evidence, the judge is presumed to disregard it, and this presumption was not overcome here because the record affirmatively reflected that the judge disregarded the inadmissible evidence and stated his decision would be based solely on evidence presented at trial.
[1] A trial judge's review of a probable cause affidavit containing hearsay statements does not automatically warrant recusal when the judge is also the trier of fact.
[2] When a trial judge, sitting as the trier of fact, erroneously admits evidence, the judge is presumed to have disregarded that evidence unless the record affirmatively sho…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“When a trial judge, sitting as the trier of fact, erroneously admits evidence, the judge is presumed to have disregarded that evidence.”
Establishes the legal standard for inadmissible evidence in bench trials—judges are presumed to disregard it.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceC.W. was convicted in a bench trial (judge as trier of fact). Before the trial, the judge reviewed a probable cause affidavit prepared by the arrestin…
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 Impartiality Of Judge cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, J.
C.W.’s conviction and sentence are affirmed.
We find no error or abuse of discretion in the trial judge’s denial of a motion to recuse based on his reading the probable cause affidavit containing hearsay statements. It is undisputed that the judge, before the bench trial, reviewed the probable cause affidavit prepared by the arresting officer. The record contains certain statements by the court indicating that it was the judge’s practice to review files before conducting juvenile hearings.
When a trial judge, sitting as the trier of fact, erroneously admits evidence, the judge is presumed to have disregarded that evidence. State v. Arroyo, 422 So. 2d 50, 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). If, however, the record discloses that the judge relied upon the inadmissible evidence, this presumption is overcome. Id. In any event, here, the record affirmatively reflects that the judge did not consider and disregarded the inadmissible evidence. See, e.g., Lieberman v. Dep’t of Prof'l Regulation, Bd. of Med., 573 So. 2d 349, 352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)(finding introduction of inadmissible evidence harmful, but stating, “Had the trial judge stated that he based his findings only upon certain evidence and that he disregarded the challenged evidence, the error, if any, in the admission of such evidence could have been determined harmless.”); Capitoli v. State, 175 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). Compare J.D. v. State, 553 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
In the instant case, there is no suggestion from the record that the judge relied on the affidavit in any way. Further, the trial judge stated that his decision would be based solely on the evidence presented.
C.W.’s assertion that judges treat inadmissible evidence the same as juries is misplaced. We deem Barnes v. State, 589 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), and other authority relied on by C.W., inapposite here, as the evidence was not presented to a jury. Clearly, judges are in a better position to discard contested evidence. See First Atlantic Nat’l Bank of Daytona Beach v. Cobbett, 82 So. 2d 870 (Fla.1955)(finding no harmful error where evidence considered and evaluated by experienced trial judge); Prince v. Aucilla River Naval Stores Co., 103 Fla. 605, 137 So. 886 (1931)(finding errors in admission and rejection of evidence to be harmless where case tried before judge rather than jury)-
As there is nothing in the record to suggest that the judge was not impartial, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
POLEN, C.J. and GROSS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Petion v. State, 48 So. 3d 726 (Fla. 2010)…error in admitting this testimony was harmless in this case, which was tried without a jury. When a trial judge, sitting as the trier of fact, erroneously admits evidence, the judge is 'presumed to have disregarded that evidence. See C.W. v. State, 793 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Although this presumption is rebuttable, nothing in the record suggests that the trial judge relied upon this inadmissible evidence. Id. (emphasis supplied). Accordingly, the Fourth District affirmed Petion’s conviction for pos…1 / 2
-
Petion v. State, 4 So. 3d 83 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…y error in admitting this testimony was harmless in this case, which was tried without a jury. When a trial judge, sitting as the trier of fact, erroneously admits evidence, the judge is presumed to have disregarded that evidence. See C.W. v. State, 793 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Although this presumption is rebuttable, nothing in the record suggests that the trial judge relied upon this inadmissible evidence. Accordingly, we affirm the defendant’s convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to se…
-
M.T. v. State, 805 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. We affirm the disposition order on appeal. See C.W. v. State, 793 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). However, we agree with appellant that, after witholding adjudication of delinquency, the trial court erred in failing to specify that the maximum period of time he may serve on community control is until his nineteenth birthday.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- First Atl. Nat'l Bank OF Daytona Beach v. Olive S. Cobbett, 82 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 1955)
- Prince v. Aucilla River Naval Stores Co., 103 Fla. 605 (Fla. 1931)
- State v. Augustine Lasaro Arroyo, 422 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Capitoli v. State, 175 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- J.D. v. State, 553 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Robert A. Lieberman, M.D. v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg., 573 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Barnes v. State, 589 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)