LUIS BIANCHI, 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 court held that a defendant cannot complain about an error they induced by refusing a reasonable opportunity to cure it.
The defendant was convicted of aggravated assault and carrying a concealed firearm. He appealed, arguing that a police officer's testimony should have…
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.
Defendant, Luis Bianchi, was found guilty of aggravated assault and carrying a concealed firearm. On appeal he urges that testimony given at trial by a police officer called as a witness for the prosecution should have been excluded because the officer failed to appear for the taking of his deposition.
The record on appeal reveals that while one witness called by the state did not appear for the taking of his deposition, the defendant made no attempt to re-subpoena or reset the deposition before trial. Additionally, when the trial judge was informed of this incident just before the subject witness was to testify, an offer was made to defense counsel to depose the witness before continuing with trial. This opportunity was turned down by the defense.
It is the opinion of this court that defendant is complaining about an error he induced himself and he may not take advantage of it. Gagnon v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 212 So.2d 337. Defendant had the opportunity to re-notice the taking of the subject witness’ deposition, and he waived the right to depose that witness before his testimony.
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Touchette v. Bould, 324 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…ence of the defendants. Appellee contends that if it was error for the jury to be instructed on loss of prospective estate as an element of plaintiff’s damages, this was invited error which cannot be remedied on appeal. See, e. g., Bianchi v. State, 272 So. 2d 8 (3rd DCA Fla.1973). Appellants contend that it is fundamental error involving lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which cannot be waived and can be raised by the parties at any time. See, 8 Fla.Jur., Courts, § 114 (1956); Rule 1.140(h) RCP; Rule 3.…
-
Filgueiras v. State, 291 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…fendant elected to utilize so much of the tapes and their transcriptions as were available and he cannot now urge error in the court doing what he asked the court to do. Gagnon v. State, Fla.App.1968, 212 So. 2d 337; Bianchi v. State, Fla.App. 1973, 272 So. 2d 8. The trial could have proceeded in a normal course. If the State had [*23] attempted to introduce the tapes and their transcriptions, an appropriate objection could have been made and the trial court’s ruling thereupon duly tested. But, as the case…
-
Fred v. Spadaro, 332 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…as Spadaro’s counsel who requested that the jury be so charged. Spadaro is in no position to complain of a felony verdict which was dispositive of the issues tried and consistent with instructions erroneously given at his request. Bianchi v. State, 272 So. 2d 8 (Fla.App.3d, 1973); Castle v. State, 305 So. 2d 794 (Fla.App.4th, 1975), cert. den. 317 So. 2d 766. We therefore do not reach the question of whether the jury, which had not dispersed from the courthouse, could be recalled to consider a corrected fo…
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
- Adler v. Copa Corp., 212 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)