Costales v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Costales v. State

438 So. 2d 981, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24500

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 11, 1983

DocketNo. 82-2451

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 438 So. 2d 981 (Costales 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

Costales v. State, 438 So. 2d 981, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24500 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Costales appeals his convictions and sentences entered pursuant to a jury verdict finding him guilty of three counts of robbery and burglary of a structure.

At trial, Detective Smith testified, regarding a photo lineup, that upon receiving a description of the perpetrator of the crime from the victim, he investigated other cases and put together the photographic lineup from which the victim identified the defendant. The defendant moved for a mistrial on the basis that said testimony implies the defendant has a criminal background and as such was inadmissible, improper and constituted reversible error. On appeal the sole point raised was error in denial of the motion for mistrial.

This appeal is without merit and the order of the trial court is affirmed on the authority of Williams v. State, 438 So.2d 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Evans v. State, 422 So.2d 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Moore v. State, 418 So.2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Willis v. State, 208 So.2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Costales appeals his convictions and sentences entered pursuant to a jury verdict finding him guilty of three counts of robbery and burglary of a structure.

At trial, Detective Smith testified, regarding a photo lineup, that upon receiving a description of the perpetrator of the crime from the victim, he investigated other cases and put together the photographic lineup from which the victim identified the defendant. The defendant moved for a mistrial on the basis that said testimony implies the defendant has a criminal background and as such was inadmissible, improper and constituted reversible error. On appeal the sole point raised was error in denial of the motion for mistrial.

This appeal is without merit and the order of the trial court is affirmed on the authority of Williams v. State, 438 So.2d 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Evans v. State, 422 So.2d 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Moore v. State, 418 So.2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Willis v. State, 208 So.2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

438 So. 2d 981, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/costales-v-state-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack