RICHARD WILLIAM MACHARA AND GARY JOHN MEISTER, APPELLANTS,
v.
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 admitting evidence of defendants' drug addiction and prior unrelated crimes constituted reversible error.
Defendants were convicted of third-degree arson. The state introduced evidence of their drug addiction and attempts to break into a drug store and a b…
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 Other Crimes Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendants were convicted and sentenced for third degree arson and now bring this consolidated appeal. We reverse.
The state, via its witnesses and over defendants’ objections, brought out the fact that the defendants were drug addicts. This constituted reversible error because it was an attack upon the character of the defendants when the defendants had not first put their character in evidence. Mann v. State, Fla.1886, 22 Fla. 600. See also 13 Fla.Jur., Evidence, § 152 et seq. The state’s excuse, an avoidance mentioned here for the first time, is that this testimony supplied the motive for the crime because as a matter of common knowledge it takes money to supply the drug habit. This is simply too remote. Powell v. State, 1937, 131 Fla. 254, 175 So. 213.
Secondly, the state likewise introduced testimony that defendants had attempted to break into a drug store, and that they had broken and entered a bakery for the purpose of destroying it with dynamite. This testimony of other crimes doesn’t qualify under the rule found in Williams v. State, Fla. 1959, 110 So.2d 654, because it is not relevant with reference to a material fact in issue. Lucas v. State, Fla.App.1971, *871257 So.2d 261; Reyes v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 253 So.2d 907; Franklin v. State, Fla.App.1969, 229 So.2d 892.
, The judgments are reversed and the causes remanded with instructions to grant defendants a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
WALDEN, CROSS and MAGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baxter v. State, 294 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)…e defendant testifies in his own behalf. The [*393] latter is permissible while the former is not. Evidence of the bad character of an accused is admissible only after he has introduced evidence of his good character. Machara v. State, Fla.App.1973, 272 So. 2d 870; 1 Wigmore on Evidence, § 57 (3rd Ed.1940); 13 Fla.Jur., Evidence, § 154. However, when a witness, whether a party or not, and whether the case be civil or criminal, takes the witness stand he ipso facto places his credibility in issue. Ivey v. Stat…
-
Taylor v. State, 508 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…for a new trial. The fact that appellant was charged with a crime is an essential element of the state’s case. Fischer v. State, 429 So. 2d 1309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). However, the nature of the charges is not essential in this case. Machara v. State, 272 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. den., 277 So. 2d 535 (1973). Accusations of sexually deviant behavior are inherently denigrating. Sias v. State, 416 So. 2d 1213 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. den., 424 So. 2d 763 (1982). The charge of such conduct, unanswered, cannot b…
-
Butler v. State, 376 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…ted between attack on a defendant’s general character and his reputation for truth and veracity. “Evidence of the bad character of an accused is admissible only after he has introduced evidence of his good character. Machara v. State, Fla.App.1973, 272 So. 2d 870; 1 Wigmore on Evidence, § 57 (3rd Ed. 1940); 13 FlaJur., Evidence, § 154. However, when a witness, whether a party or not, and whether the case be civil or criminal, takes the witness stand he ipso facto places his credibility in issue. Ivey v. Stat…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 110 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1959)
- Mann v. State, 22 Fla. 600 (Fla. 1886)
- Powell v. State, 175 So. 213 (Fla. 1937)
- N. Inv. Corp. v. Cora Alice Cannon, 173 So. 273 (Fla. 1937)
- Peel v. State, 229 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)
- Reyes v. State, 253 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- O'Sullivan v. Alday, 257 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)