Bacon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bacon v. State

578 So. 2d 1137, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3640, 1991 WL 60860

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 24, 1991

DocketNo. 88-0951

StatusPublished

This text of 578 So. 2d 1137 (Bacon v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bacon v. State, 578 So. 2d 1137, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3640, 1991 WL 60860 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in allowing the state to call a court-appointed psychiatrist as a witness in direct violation of the provisions of Rule 3.211(e), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and Pouncy v. State, 353 So.2d 640 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).

We reject appellant’s claim that insufficient evidence was presented to sustain his convictions. However, our reversal is without prejudice to appellant to challenge the state’s use of witnesses or their prior statements in violation of the Florida Evidence Code. See State v. Delgado-Santos, 497 So.2d 1199 (Fla.1986); Parnell v. State, 500 So.2d 558 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Our reversal moots the other issues raised on appeal.

HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in allowing the state to call a court-appointed psychiatrist as a witness in direct violation of the provisions of Rule 3.211(e), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and Pouncy v. State, 353 So.2d 640 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).

We reject appellant’s claim that insufficient evidence was presented to sustain his convictions. However, our reversal is without prejudice to appellant to challenge the state’s use of witnesses or their prior statements in violation of the Florida Evidence Code. See State v. Delgado-Santos, 497 So.2d 1199 (Fla.1986); Parnell v. State, 500 So.2d 558 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Our reversal moots the other issues raised on appeal.

HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

578 So. 2d 1137, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3640, 1991 WL 60860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bacon-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack