C.H., 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.
The court held that while there was sufficient evidence to support the delinquency adjudication, the trial court erred in denying the child the right to the concluding closing argument.
A child, C.H., was adjudicated delinquent for resisting an officer without violence. C.H. presented only his own testimony at trial. The trial court 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 Resisting An Officer Without Violence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
C.H. appeals an adjudication of delinquency entered against him for a charge of resisting an officer without violence. C.H. argues that there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court’s denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal and that the trial court erred in allowing the State to speak first and last in closing argument. We find that there was sufficient evidence to overcome a motion for judgment of acquittal and affirm on this issue. See I.M. v. State, 917 So. 2d 927, 929 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). However, we hold that the trial court erred in directing the State to proceed first and last in closing argument, and reverse and remand for further proceedings.
Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.110(d) states that “[a] child offering no testimony in his or her own behalf except his or her own shall be entitled to the concluding argument.” Section 918.19, Florida Statutes (2007), provides, however, that the prosecution may speak first and last during closing arguments in a criminal prosecution. In E.K. v. State, 963 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), this court held that in juvenile delinquency cases Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.110(d) governs. Further, “because the right to a final closing argument is a vested procedural right, the error cannot be considered harmless.” Id. at 309-310 (citing Wike v. State, 648 So. 2d 683, 686 (Fla.1994); Freeman v. State, 846 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)).
Here, C.H. offered only his own testimony as evidence at trial and, thus, was entitled to the concluding argument under rule 8.110(d). Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.
ALLEN, WEBSTER and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
D.B. v. State, 979 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…or her behalf. § 918.19, Fla. Stat. (2007); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.381. However, a juvenile delinquency case is not an adult criminal prosecution, and therefore, Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.110(d) governs juvenile proceedings. See C.H. v. State, 969 So. 2d 567, 567-68 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); E.K. v. State, 963 So. 2d 309, 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The rule states that “[a] child offering no testimony in his or her own behalf except his or her own shall be entitled to the concluding argument.” Fla. R. Juv. P.…
-
J.C. v. State, 988 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…that expressly and directly conflicts with a decision of another district court of appeal or of the supreme court on the same question of law.”). Appellant argues that two cases, E.K. v. State, 963 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), and C.H. v. State, 969 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), expressly and directly conflict with the limited remedy set in place by this Court in D.B. See D.B., 979 So. 2d at 1121. We disagree. In C.H., the First District — after finding error where a juvenile division trial court allowe…
Authorities Cited
- I.M. a child v. State, 917 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
- Warfield Raymond Wike, Jr. v. State, 648 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 1994)
- E.K. a Child v. State, 963 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
- Stepphone Freeman v. State, 846 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)