FRANK BAFFUTO, 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.
The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a conviction for uttering a forged prescription because the trial court improperly allowed a police officer to testify that scratch marks on the defendant's arms were from heroin use, deeming the testimony irrelevant and prejudicial.
Yes, the trial court erred in admitting the officer's testimony regarding the scratch marks.
“that in his opinion certain scratch marks found on the defendant's arms at the time of his arrest were the result of the use of heroin.”
describes the testimony that formed the basis of the appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was tried on three charges related to the illegal use of narcotic drugs. A jury found him guilty of only one charge: uttering a forged p…
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 Prejudicial Effect cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was tried on three different charges for violations of the uniform narcotic drug law: unlawful possession of narcotic drug; forgery of prescription for narcotic drug and uttering forged prescription for narcotic drug. A jury found him guilty of only one of the charges, i. e., uttering a forged prescription for a narcotic drug in violation of § 398.19(4), F.S.A., and not guilty of the other charges. This appeal is from the judgment and sentence of two years in the state penitentiary.
One of the points urged by appellant for .reversal is: that the trial judge erred in permitting a police officer to testify over objection, that in his opinion certain scratch marks found on the defendant’s arms at the *80time of his arrest were the result of the use of heroin. We find merit in appellant’s contention and reverse.
This testimony was irrelevant to the cause and clearly prejudicial to the rights of the defendant.1 Accordingly the judgment and sentence appealed is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reis v. State, 248 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…al and should have resulted in a mistrial. This point was argued to the trial court and is proper for argument and consideration on appeal. To support her claim of prejudice sufficient to warrant a mistrial Reis cites Baffuto v. State, Fla.App.1966, 187 So. 2d 79; and Blackwell v. State, 76 Fla. 124, 79 So. 731 (1918). The state points out that there was no objection to the question asked Bernstein and that there was no motion to strike his answer which is claimed to be prejudicial. See Morris v. State, 100…
-
Hargrove v. State, 431 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…e, 356 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) (number of arrests made in complex where the defendant was arrested); Kellum v. State, 104 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958) (similar crimes of larceny were committed by other police officers); and Baffuto v. State, 187 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966) (heroin marks on defendant’s arms irrelevant to charge of forgery of a prescription). The duty to prosecute does not transcend the duty to be fair. We assume the conduct complained of resulted from an honest error of judgment rat…
-
Johnson v. State, 343 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)…ly threatened. . Appellant makes no contention that he did not first receive proper Miranda warnings. . The evidence was only admitted with respect to the charge of possession. At first blush our holding appears to conflict with Baffuto v. State, 187 So. 2d 79 (Fla.3d DCA 1966), in which our sister court held that it was error to permit a police officer to testify over objection that in his opinion certain scratch marks found on the defendant’s arms when he was arrested were the result of the use of heroi…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Will Blackwell and Robert Blackwell v. State, 76 Fla. 124 (Fla. 1918)