Carmichael v. State

670 So. 2d 1178, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3340, 1996 WL 148997
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 3, 1996·No. No. 95-2304·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The record reflects that the trial court committed reversible error in curtailing the defendant’s cross-examination of the prosecution’s chief witness as to her possible motive, bias, or self-interest. The law in Florida is clear that evidence tending to establish that a witness appearing before the State for any reason other than to tell the truth should not be kept from the jury. A trial court’s refusal, in a criminal prosecution, to allow cross-examination of a witness concerning a pending civil action between that witness and the defendant is error. See Wooten v. State, 464 So.2d 640 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 475 So.2d 696 (Fla.1985).

Reversed.

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

Carmichael v. State, 670 So. 2d 1178, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3340, 1996 WL 148997 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

670 So. 2d 1178 (Carmichael v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lavin v. State
754 So. 2d 784 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Nelson v. State
704 So. 2d 752 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)