DYKE

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Coffee v. State, 699 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
  …xas follow the rationale of the contemporaneous objection rule and have applied it in dealing with motions in limine. See generally State v. Synoracki, 253 Kan. 59, 853 P. 2d 24 (1993); Willis v. State, 785 S.W. 2d 378 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 908, 111 S.Ct. 279, 112 L.Ed.2d 234 (1990). Therefore, to maintain consistency with Florida’s prior rulings on motions in limine, we align this court with the courts of Kansas and Texas and conclude that where a party makes a successful motion in limine…
• Wilton A. Dedge v. State, 723 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
  …ase was not developed until 1985. Our research discloses the first appellate case which upheld the admission of that test in evidence was a Virginia court in 1990. Spencer v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 240 Va. 78, 393 S.E. 2d 609 (Va.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 908, 111 S.Ct. 281, 112 L.Ed.2d 235 (1990) (PCR method is sufficiently reliable to go to the jury). Even today, its admissibility in Florida may be the subject of dispute.4 See Murray v. State, 692 So. 2d 157 (Fla.1997). As explained in 1 Modem Scientif…