HORACE OLIVER RUCKER, 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.
Defendant Rucker was convicted of robbery and sentenced to 99 years in prison. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the prosecutor's reference to and introduction of the defendant's mugshots constituted reversible error.
The introduction and submission of the defendant's mugshots to the jury, combined with the prosecutor's references to them as mugshots during closing argument, constituted reversible error warranting a new trial.
[1] The introduction into evidence and submission to the jury of defendant's "mug shots" constitutes reversible error when the nature of the photographs is clearly indicated…
[2] Reference to "mug shots" by the prosecutor during closing argument, coupled with their introduction into evidence and submission to the jury, can constitute reversible er…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“the reference to introduction into evidence and submission to the jury of the defendant's "mug shots" in the instant case constituted reversible error”
The court's holding that the mugshot evidence was improperly admitted and constituted grounds for reversal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendant Rucker was tried by jury for robbery and found guilty. The prosecution introduced photographs identified as mugshots of the defendant, showi…
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 Mug Shots cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant-appellant was informed against for robbery, tried by jury, found guilty and sentenced to 99 years in the state penitentiary.
Appellant first urges as reversible error the trial court’s denial of his motions for mistrial upon the prosecutor’s reference to and the introduction into evidence and submission to the jury of “mug shots” of the defendant. We find this point well taken.
An examination of the record in the case sub judice clearly reflects that the prosecutor during his closing argument to the jury referred twice to the photographs of the defendant, which were introduced during the trial as “mug shots”. In addition, the record further demonstrates that although the police identification numbers of the defendant’s photographs were concealed, these numbers on the bottom of some of the other photographs, which were submitted to the jury for their review along with those photographs of the defendant, remained uncovered. The subject photographs, showing a front and profile view together with the dates, numbers and name of the police department, clearly indicated to the jury the nature thereof. See Barnes v. United States, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 318, 365 F. 2d 509 (1966). Thus, we find that the reference to introduction into evidence and submission to the jury of the defendant’s “mug shots” in the instant case constituted reversible error. See Loftin v. State, Fla. 1973, 273 So. 2d 70; Jones v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So. 2d 24; Whitehead v. State, Fla.App.1973, 279 So. 2d 99.
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence herein appealed is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
Before HENDRY, HAVERFIELD and NATHAN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Appellee, the State of Florida, petitioned for rehearing and as the basis therefor points out that although it appears from the record as presented to this court that the police identification numbers on the bottom of some of the photographs, which were presented to the jury for their review, were not concealed, these numbers on all of the photographs in fact were concealed.
This fact notwithstanding, after a careful examination of the record in its entirety, we still conclude that the reference of the prosecutor to the subject photographs, showing a front and profile view as mug shots clearly indicated to the jury the nature thereof.
Accordingly, the petition for rehearing is denied.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Rucker, 330 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 1976)…ENGLAND, Justice. By petition for a writ of certiorari, the State asks that we review and reverse a decision of the Third District Court of Appeal reported at 307 So. 2d 830. We noted a direct conflict between that decision and Loftin v. State, 273 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1973), issued our writ and dispensed with oral argument. The point at issue is whether reference to the phrase “mug shots” in a prosecutor’s closing argument…
-
D'Anna v. State, 453 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…v. State, 450 So. 2d 242, 245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Although the photographs introduced below were not specifically referred to in front of the jury as “mug shots,” there is little doubt that the jury could have so interpreted them. Rucker v. State, 307 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), vacated on other grounds, 330 So. 2d 470 (Fla.1976) (photographs introduced at defendant’s trial contained name of arresting law enforcement agency, date of arrest, and case identification number); see also Wilding v. State, 427…
-
Rucker v. State, 335 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…is cause recurs for consideration upon the mandate of the Supreme Court of Florida pursuant to the opinion and judgment of that court filed April 7,1976 (330 So. 2d 470) vacating the judgment of this court in this cause entered on November 26, 1974, 307 So. 2d 830. In accord with the directive of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida this court’s mandate heretofore issued in this cause on February 21, 1975 is withdrawn, this court’s judgment filed November 26, 1974 is vacated and the said opinion and…
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
- Barnes v. United States, 365 F.2d 509 (D.C. Cir. 1966)
- Blackman v. State, 279 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Loftin v. State, 273 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1973)
- Jones v. State, 194 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)