ANTHONY P. RAWLS, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT

Fla. 2d DCA | 2003-01-22
No. 2D02-836
NORTHCUTT and THREADGILL, EDWARD F., Senior Judge, Concur.
834 So. 2d 940 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2003) Positive Treatment
Cited by 12 cases
Opinion of the Court
SILBERMAN, Judge.

SILBERMAN, Judge.

Anthony P. Rawls appeals his conviction and sentence for lewd molestation. He argues that the trial court should have granted his motion for mistrial and that he is entitled to a new trial due to the ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. The State cross-appeals the trial court’s order granting Rawls’ motion in limine to exclude Williams1 rule evidence. We affirm as to all issues without comment except to note that our decision is without prejudice to Rawls’ filing a timely, legally sufficient motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 3.850 on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT and THREADGILL, EDWARD F., Senior Judge, Concur. . Williams v. State, 110 So. 2d 654, 660-62 (Fla.1959).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Liborio Romero v. State, 901 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
    …ters going to credibility, he must make the witness his own. Stated more succinctly, this rule posits that the defendant may not use cross-examination [*267] as a vehicle for presenting defensive evidence. (citations omitted). In Stotler v. State, 834 So. 2d 940, 943 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), we stated that to determine the proper scope of a defendant’s cross-examination in a criminal case, a court must keep in mind “the expansive perimeters of subject matter relevance which the constitutional guarantee of cross…
  • Wyon Dale Childers v. State, 936 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
    …ant and the alleged victim, on the one hand, and one of the State’s chief witnesses, on the other, were crucial to the case, any evidence tending to prove a motive to lie by the State’s witness is both relevant and admissible”); • Stotler v. State, 834 So. 2d 940, 943-44 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (finding the trial court erred in precluding appellant from cross-examining co-defendant as to conversations that occurred during a transaction shown on a videotape entered into evidence by the State); • Hinojosa v. Stat…
  • Longval v. State, 914 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
    …missible over a hearsay objection. Longval’s statements to Hile were not hearsay under section 90.801(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2004), because they described and gave significance to ambiguous acts, her conduct on the videotape. See Stotler v. State, 834 So. 2d 940, 944 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (holding that defense witness’s in-court recitation of defendant’s out of court statements, which where inaudible on surveillance videotape, were not hearsay because they were “statements describing ambiguous acts” or “verba…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw