WILLIE JAMES SETZLER, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Snowden v. State, 537 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
  …vidence because it had been given cautionary instructions no less than twelve times and, despite the quantity of evidence pertaining to the collateral crimes, had acquitted the defendant of one of the charged murders. Likewise, in Headrick v. State, 240 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970), the court affirmed the defendant’s convictions of the burglary and grand larceny crimes charged—rejecting the defendant’s argument that the State’s evidence covered so many different and separate transactions that it “transcended…
• Whiteman v. State, 343 So. 2d 1340 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)
  …t find that the asserted relevance of the so-called “independent crimes” (the handling-fondling, pornography reading, bathing and sexual by-play) is “illusory, fancied, supposititious or unsubstantial” as claimed by appellant. See Headrick v. State, 240 So. 2d 203, 205 (Fla.2d DCA 1970). Rather, there was an obvious similarity between the offenses charged in the informations and the independent crimes testified to by the victim. With specific reference to the caveat in the second Williams case, we are cogniz…
• Headrick v. State, 268 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972)
  …that the trial Judge unduly restricted the voir dire examination of the prospective jurors by the defendants’ counsel”, which question was resolved by this Court adverse to Headrick, as had the trial Court. [*391] Thereafter, on October 9, 1970, in 240 So. 2d 203, this Court again reviewed judgment of conviction upon direct appeal, and again, in an opinion written by the author hereof, concurred in by Judges Liles and McNulty, once more affirmed the judgment of conviction on the merits. The principal point t…

  ← 1 / 2 →