JAMES HAMPTON, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed felony battery conviction where trial court properly admitted prior convictions to impeach defendant's exculpatory out-of-court statements made through another witness, but remanded for entry of written competency order.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a defendant's prior convictions to impeach exculpatory out-of-court statements elicited by defense counsel through another witness when the defendant does not testify.
[1] A non-testifying defendant who elicits his own exculpatory statements through another witness risks impeachment of those statements by prior felony convictions under Flor…
Previewing 1 of 1 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 non-testifying defendant who brings out his or her own exculpatory statements through another witness, 'runs the risk of having those statements impeached by felony convictions.'”
Court cautioning about the risk of impeachment when defendant elicits own exculpatory statements through another witness
Hampton was tried for felony battery. Defense counsel elicited Hampton's exculpatory out-of-court statements through another witness to suggest self-d…
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 Felony Battery cases and more on FLexlaw
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of appellant’s prior convictions in his trial for felony battery. Under section 90.806(1), Florida Statutes, the state was allowed to intro*790duce appellant’s prior convictions to impeach his exculpatory out-of-court statements, which were elicited by defense counsel through another witness to suggest that appellant acted in self-defense. As we cautioned in Gonzalez v. State, “a non-testifying defendant who brings out his or her own exculpatory statements through another witness, ‘runs the risk of having those statements impeached by felony convictions.’ ” 948 So.2d 877 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (quoting Kelly v. State, 857 So.2d 949, 950 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)).
We affirm appellant’s conviction. However, because the trial court did not enter a written order upon its oral finding that the previously committed appellant was competent to proceed to trial, we remand this case solely for the trial court to enter a written order finding appellant competent to proceed, pursuant to Rules 3.212(b) and (c)(7) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Boone v. State, 805 So.2d 1040, 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Corbitt v. State, 744 So.2d 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
Affirmed, but Remanded.
STEVENSON and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Michael v. State, 35 So. 3d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
Authorities Cited
- Corbitt v. State, 744 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
- Kelly v. State, 857 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Arselio Gonzalez v. State, 948 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Boone v. State, 805 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)