Crawford v. State

494 So. 2d 311, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2037, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9784
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 24, 1986·No. No. 83-1322·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal has been reconsidered on remand from the supreme court. See Crawford v. State, 491 So.2d 1142 (Fla.1986).

We conclude that the error, discussed more fully by this court in Crawford v. State, 473 So.2d 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), is harmless error. In determining that the error was harmless, we have applied the rigorous analysis required by State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986), and find the state has met its burden in proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not affect the verdict.

AFFIRMED.

DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., concur.

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

Crawford v. State, 494 So. 2d 311, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2037, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9784 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

494 So. 2d 311 (Crawford v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Asbridge
555 N.W.2d 571 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1996)
Lucier v. N.D. Workers Compensation Bureau
North Dakota Supreme Court, 1996
Holmes v. State
565 So. 2d 824 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)