HARRY WILLIAM PINNELL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Pinnell appealed his conviction for two counts of lewd and lascivious assault, challenging the trial court's evidentiary ruling that excluded testimony from a PACE social worker based on the sexual assault counselor-victim privilege. The appellate court affirmed the conviction and the trial court's privilege determination.
The court affirmed the trial court's determination. The appellate court found that PACE met the statutory definition of a 'rape crisis center' and that the PACE social worker could be considered a 'sexual assault counselor' under the statute, making the sexual assault counselor-victim privilege applicable.
[1] A sexual assault counselor-victim privilege applies to confidential communications made by a victim to an employee of a rape crisis center whose primary purpose is render…
[2] A trial court's factual findings regarding whether an organization qualifies as a rape crisis center and its employee as a sexual assault counselor are subject to appella…
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“A victim has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, a confidential communication made by the victim to a sexual assault counselor or any record made in the course of advising, counseling, or assisting the victim.”
Establishes the statutory sexual assault counselor-victim privilege that the trial court properly applied.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePinnell was convicted of two counts of lewd and lascivious assault. At trial, the defendant sought to question a PACE social worker about a conversati…
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
FLETCHER, Judge.
Harry William Pinnell appeals from his conviction and sentence for two counts of lewd and lascivious assault. We affirm.
Pinnell asserts that the trial court reversibly erred by determining that a PACE 1 social worker could not be questioned about a conversation with the victim as the conversation fell within the sexual assault counselor-victim privilege created
by section 90.5035, Florida Statutes. That section provides, in part:
“(1) For purposes of this section:
(a) A ‘rape crisis center’ is any public or private agency that offers assistance to victims of sexual assault or sexual battery and their families.
(b) A ‘sexual assault counselor’ is any employee of a rape crisis center whose primary purpose is the rendering of advice, counseling, or assistance to victims of sexual assault or sexual battery.
(2) A victim has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, a confidential communication made by the victim to a sexual assault counselor or any record made in the course of advising, counseling, or assisting the victim.... This privilege includes any advice given by the sexual assault counselor in the course of that relationship.”
§ 90.5035(l)(a),(b),(2), Fla. Stat. (1999).
The trial court found that PACE met the statutory definition of a “rape crisis center” and that the PACE social worker could be considered a “sexual assault counselor” as statutorily definéd. Consequently, the trial court held that the statutory sexual assault counselor-victim privilege applies. After a careful examination of the record, we cannot say that, under the circumstances presented, we disagree with the trial court’s factual findings regarding either the PACE Center for Girls, Inc. or its social worker.2
Affirmed.
SHEVIN, J., concurs.
. PACE Center for Girls, Inc. is a gender-responsive, school-based program, established as an alternative to incarceration or institutionalization of at-risk adolescent girls in Florida.
. We find Pinnell's other complaint to be without merit.
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge
(specially concurring).
As an additional basis for affirmance, it should be emphasized that, not only has the defendant not established the likelihood, or even the possibility, that the victim’s statements to the counselor were in any way favorable to him, the circumstances strongly suggest directly to the contrary. Thus, even if the conversation were not privileged, the appellant’s argument should be rejected on the ground that he has failed in his obligation to demonstrate harmful error. Cf. State v. Fami-glietti, 817 So. 2d 901, 909 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)(Sehwartz, C.J., specially concurring in part, dissenting in part), review granted, 826 So. 2d 991 (Fla.2002), review dismissed, 838 So. 2d 528 (Fla.2003).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Famiglietti, 817 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Famiglietti v. State, 838 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2003)