METTIE LEE FRAZIER, 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.
This case reviews a conviction for robbery. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding that the eyewitness identification was sufficient and any hearsay testimony was harmless error.
1) Yes, the eyewitness identification was positive and unequivocal, providing substantial competent evidence to sustain the conviction. 2) No, the hearsay testimony was cumulative and repetitious of other evidence, rendering it harmless error.
“The evidence discloses that the witnesses made positive and unequivocal identification under circumstances which gave such witnesses ample opportunity to make and establish such identification.”
establishes the sufficiency of the eyewitness identification.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was convicted of robbery in a non-jury trial. The conviction was based on eyewitness identification. The appellant argued that the ident…
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 Hearsay Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant seeks review of his conviction of the crime of robbery pursuant to a non-jury trial.
Appellant contends (1) that the State failed to establish a prima facie case of robbery against him on the ground that the identification of him by eye witnesses was unsatisfactory and (2) that the trial court committed error in permitting the police officer to testify that an alleged identification of the defendant had been made during the course of the officer’s investigation when such testimony, as to the appellant, was hearsay.
The evidence discloses that the witnesses made positive and unequivocal identification under circumstances which gave such witnesses ample opportunity to make and establish such identification. Therefore, there was substantial competent evidence to sustain the findings of the trial court.
The second point raised by the appellant is without merit as the objectionable hearsay was entirely cumulative and repetitious of other testimony in the record and thus harmless error. See Fla.Stat. 924.33 F.S.A., Urga v. State, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 719.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Mettie Lee Frazier, 239 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…bbery. On January 16, 1968, he was found and adjudged guilty, and sentenced to confinement in the state penitentiary for a period of 30 years. Mettie Lee Frazier appealed that judgment to this court, which affirmed the judgment on December 10, 1968 (216 So. 2d 264). In the other case (appeal No. 70-152) the appellee was informed against for a separate alleged robbery, to which he initially, pleaded not guilty, later withdrew that plea and pleaded guilty to the lesser offense of assault with intent to commit…
-
J.W. v. State, 470 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Bullard v. State, 436 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); review denied, 446 So. 2d 100 (Fla.1984); Melton v. State, 404 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 3d DCA), appeal dismissed, 411 So. 2d 383 (Fla.1981); Frazier v. State, 216 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).…
Authorities Cited
- Diamante Urga v. State, 155 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)