Body v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Body v. State

76 So. 3d 388, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 20854, 2011 WL 6851244

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 30, 2011·No. No. 1D10-5036·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded. See Lawhorne v. State, 500 So.2d 519, 521-23 (Fla.1986) (holding that questioning of defendant about whether his six prior convictions went to trial was proper rehabilitation); Watkins v. State, 933 So.2d 1294, 1295-96 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (refusal to allow defendant to testify that his two, prior felony convictions were the product of guilty pleas not harmless error where defendant’s credibility at issue); Bowles v. State, 849 So.2d 465, 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (refusal to allow defendant to testify that his prior felony convictions had been resolved by guilty pleas not harmless error, as his “credibility was plainly at issue”).

BENTON, C.J., VAN NORTWICK, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded. See Lawhorne v. State, 500 So.2d 519, 521-23 (Fla.1986) (holding that questioning of defendant about whether his six prior convictions went to trial was proper rehabilitation); Watkins v. State, 933 So.2d 1294, 1295-96 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (refusal to allow defendant to testify that his two, prior felony convictions were the product of guilty pleas not harmless error where defendant’s credibility at issue); Bowles v. State, 849 So.2d 465, 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (refusal to allow defendant to testify that his prior felony convictions had been resolved by guilty pleas not harmless error, as his “credibility was plainly at issue”).

BENTON, C.J., VAN NORTWICK, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

Body v. State, 76 So. 3d 388, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 20854, 2011 WL 6851244 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

76 So. 3d 388 (Body v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related