JACK WILSON MERCHANT, APPELLANT,
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 affirmed the judgment and sentence, finding no prejudicial error in the trial court's evidentiary rulings or procedural handling of dying declarations testimony.
A trial court's admission of evidence without preliminary examination of dying declaration witnesses does not constitute reversible error when any procedural defect is cured and no prejudice results.
[1] A trial court's procedural error in admitting dying declarations testimony without preliminary examination is not reversible error when the error is cured and causes no p…
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 intelligenceAppellant Merchant was convicted and sentenced based on evidence that was in conflict, with the trial court admitting certain evidence without objecti…
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 Procedural Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have carefully examined the record-on-appeal and briefs filed by able counsel. Although the evidence giving rise to the entry of the judgment and sentence here appealed was in conflict, those conflicts were resolved by the trier of the fact for whose judgment we may not substitute ours. We find no error of law as applied to those facts. Appellant objects, among other things, to certain evidence admitted at trial without objection. We do not find the admission of that evidence, if error at all, to be fundamental and therefore constitute a basis for reversal. Appellant further contends that the trial court procedurally erred in the admission of testimony relating to dying declarations without first conducting a preliminary examination of the witness and then and there rendering an adjudication as to admissibility. Our examination of the record reveals that if the procedure employed was error initially the error was thereafter cured. In any event, it was not (if error at all) prejudicial. Finding from the briefs and oral arguments of the parties that each point here presented has been heretofore determined by decisions of this Court and of the Supreme Court of Florida, nothing would be added to the jurisprudence of this State by again discussing those points here. Appellant having failed to demonstrate prejudicial error, the judgment and sentence appealed are
Affirmed.
BOYER, Acting C. J., MILLS, J., and TENCH, BENJAMIN M, Associate Judge, concur.