FREDDIE WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Cross-Examination Scope cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, defendant below, raises three points on this appeal from judgment of guilt and resulting sentence following a verdict by which a jury found him guilty of aggravated battery.
The record reveals that during the trial the trial judge repeatedly injected himself into the trial and on at least one instance took over the cross examination of a witness, taking the cross examination beyond the scope of the direct examination. Although we do not condone the action of the trial judge, being of the opinion that in the absence of unusual circumstances justice will best be accomplished in our adversary system of jurisprudence by leaving the examination and cross examination of witnesses to the attorneys for the parties, nevertheless in the case sub judice the record reveals that there was no objection during the trial to questions and actions of the trial judge, and since such were not so flagrant as to constitute fundamental error, and finding the remaining points to be without merit, the judgment and sentence appealed is
Affirmed.
BOYER, Acting C. J., McCORD, J., and YAWN, THERON A., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rollins v. State, 707 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…. 3d DCA), appeal dismissed, 592 So. 2d 681 (Fla.1991); Harris v. State, 564 So. 2d 1211, 1212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Griffin v. State, 502 So. 2d 1350, 1352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Scott v. State, 396 So. 2d 271, 271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Williams v. State, 305 So. 2d 45, 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Rollins next argues that his habitual offender sentence imposed pursuant to section 775.084(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1995) was inappropriate where one of the predicate felony convictions relied upon to support the enhanced…
-
Jones v. State, 582 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…stimony. First, in order to preserve for appellate review alleged improprieties of a trial judge, an objection must be made contemporaneously with the prejudicial conduct or comments. Herzog v. State, 439 So. 2d 1372 (Fla.1983); Williams v. State, 305 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Mack v. State, 270 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). An examination of the record supports the State’s contention that the defendant did not make a contemporaneous objection to the alleged misconduct by the court sufficient to pres…
-
Johnson v. State, 114 So. 3d 1012 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…ade contemporaneously with the prejudicial conduct or comments. Herzog v. State, 439 So. 2d 1372, 1376 (Fla.1983); Mathew v. State, 837 So. 2d 1167, 1170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Jones v. State, 582 So. 2d 110, 111 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Williams v. State, 305 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Johnson acknowledges that he made no contemporaneous objections to the trial court’s alleged misconduct to preserve the issue for appellate review, but claims that the court’s actions constituted fundamental error. “Fundamental…