KEVIN PURYEAR, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2002-04-24
No. 4D99-3580
POLEN, C.J., GUNTHER, STONE, WARNER, FARMER, KLEIN, STEVENSON, SHAHOOD, GROSS, TAYLOR, HAZOURI and MAY, JJ„ concur.
820 So. 2d 359 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2002) Caution
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

EN BANC ON MANDATE FROM THE SUPREME COURT

PER CURIAM.

In Puryear v. State, 810 So. 2d 901 (Fla.2002), the supreme court held that section 90.801(2), Florida Statutes (2000), did not authorize victim Amy Deese’s out-of-court descriptions of her assailant' to Danny Cratsenberg and Detective Rhonda Ward-law. This was a close case on the issue of identification. We cannot therefore say that the admission of this testimony was harmless error. Appellant’s robbery conviction is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial.

POLEN, C.J., GUNTHER, STONE, WARNER, FARMER, KLEIN, STEVENSON, SHAHOOD, GROSS, TAYLOR, HAZOURI and MAY, JJ„ concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Presley v. State, 839 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
    …ts, we find beyond a reasonable doubt, the erroneous introduction of the out-of-court description of the burglar was harmless. See Miles v. State, 839 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Goodwin v. State, 751 So. 2d 537 (Fla.1999); cf. Puryear v. State, 820 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)(erroneous introduction of out-of-court description by victim of her assailant was not harmless since this was a close case on the issue of identification). We find Presley’s additional arguments concerning remarks made during clo…
  • English v. State, 43 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)
    …. State, 839 So. 2d 813, 813-14 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (determining that erroneous introduction of victim’s out-of-court description harmless when suspect was found carrying bag containing items stolen from victim’s refrigerator). Cf. Puryear v. State, 820 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (holding that erroneous introduction of out-of-court description by victim of assailant was not harmless where close case on issue of identification). In the instant case, the trial court erred by admitting Deputy Dalton’s descr…
  • Johnson v. State, 199 So. 3d 433 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)
    …ent, would have bolstered the state’s case by corroborating the victim’s and the victim’s friend’s trial testimony describing the defendant on the night of the incident. Thus, the error would have been harmful to the defendant. See Puryear v. State, 820 So. 2d 359, 360 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (where section 90.801(2)(c) did not authorize the admission of the victim’s hearsay statement describing her assailant, and the case was close on the issue of identification, the admission of the victim’s hearsay statement w…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw