JIMMY LEE GRACE, 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 robbery with firearm conviction and life sentence, rejecting the defendant's claim that evidence of a subsequent shooting should have required ten days' notice and finding it properly admitted as consciousness of guilt evidence.
Evidence of the defendant shooting the robbery victim the night before trial was properly admitted as relevant evidence of consciousness of guilt without requiring the ten-day notice period under section 90.404(2)(d)1.
[1] Evidence of a defendant's subsequent shooting of the robbery victim is admissible as relevant evidence of consciousness of guilt under section 90.402 without requiring th…
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 intelligenceAppellant was convicted of robbery with a firearm and sentenced to life imprisonment as a prison releasee reoffender. The night before the originally …
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 Elements Of Robbery cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant appeals his conviction for robbery with a firearm and sentence to life in prison as a prison releasee reoffender. Appellant raises two issues. First, he claims fundamental error requires reversal of his robbery conviction because the defense of self-help — a defense he did not raise below — negates the elements of the offense. We find this issue to be clearly without merit. Second, appellant claims the trial court erred in allowing the state to introduce collateral crime evidence without providing ten days’ notice under section 90.404(2)(d)l., Florida Statutes (2012). The collateral crime evidence consisted of appellant shooting the robbery victim the night before the originally scheduled trial. The trial court properly admitted this evidence as relevant evidence under section 90.402, Florida Statutes (2012), to show consciousness of guilt. See Heath v. State, 648 So.2d 660, 664 (Fla.1994); King v. State, 988 So.2d 111, 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). The notice requirement of section 90.404(2)(d)l. did not apply, and even if it did, any error was harmless because defense counsel had prior knowledge of the collateral crime evidence. See Fey v. State, 125 So.3d 828 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); Miller v. State, 632 So.2d 243, 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).
Affirmed.
TAYLOR, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Beckman v. State, 230 So. 3d 77 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…timony as to-the existence of .a second list was impermissible bad character evidence. We disagree. Collateral crime evidence is admissible as relevant under section 90.402 of the Florida Statutes to show consciousness of guilt. See Grace v. State, 122 So. 3d 417, 418 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (permitting the State to introduce evidence that the defendant, who was charged with robbery, shot the robbery victim the night before trial, finding it showed consciousness of guilt); Waller v. State, 943 So. 2d 865, 866 (F…
Authorities Cited
- Heath v. State, 648 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 1994)
- Tremayne King v. State, 988 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Miller v. State, 632 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- FEY v. State, 125 So. 3d 828 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)