VINCENT WOODS, 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.
Affirmed conviction for robbery where defendant's opening of police report for cross-examination waived objection to its hearsay content, and no prejudicial error appeared in closing argument or photographic identification procedures.
A defendant who introduces a police report to impeach a witness's credibility cannot later object to admission of the entire report on hearsay grounds.
[1] A defendant who introduces evidence to impeach a witness's credibility waives any objection to the admissibility of that evidence on hearsay grounds.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“appellant, having sought to impeach a witness upon the basis of statements contained in the report, cannot later object to the admission of the report upon the ground that it contains hearsay statements”
Court's explanation of why defendant waived hearsay objection by using report for impeachment
Appellant was convicted of robbery by jury. A four-page police report was admitted into evidence, with appellant requesting admission of at least the …
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 Photographic Identification cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant was found guilty by a jury of robbery. On this appeal he asserts error upon the admission into evidence of a police report. Appellant concedes that a portion of the police report was admissible into evidence because it was admitted at his request in order that he might cross-examine a police officer as to the officer’s credibility. Appellant urges, however, in his initial point on appeal, that only the first page of the four page report should have been admitted into evidence. The trial court ruled that the report should be considered as a unit, and thereafter appellant cross-examined from the entire report. This point does not demonstrate prejudicial error because appellant, having sought to impeach a witness upon the basis of statements contained in the report, cannot later object to the admission of the report upon the ground that it contains hearsay statements. See Cox v. State, Fla.App.1969, 219 So. 2d 762. Cf. Morey v. State, 72 Fla. 45, 72 So. 490 (1916).
Appellant has presented two additional points. One point alleges that improper remarks were voiced by the state attorney in his closing argument. A second point claims prejudice in the use of certain photographs submitted to the victim for identification purposes prior to appellant’s arrest. The record does not support appellant’s claim of prejudice on either of these points. Reversible error has not been shown.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Delbert Tibbs v. State, 337 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 1976)…mark the investigator’s report into evidence carrying the same number.” (Emphasis supplied) The report was thereby stipulated into evidence. I find no reversible error as to this point. Cf. Codie v. State, 313 So. 2d 754 (Fla.1975); Woods v. State, 285 So. 2d 650 (Fla.App. 3, 1973). I have carefully considered the several other points on appeal presented by appellant and find none to be meritorious so as to constitute reversible error. I have listened carefully to oral argument, examined and considered the…
Authorities Cited
- Morey v. State, 72 Fla. 45 (Fla. 1916)
- COX v. State, 219 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)