Davis v. State

379 So. 2d 1017
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Davis v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 346 So. 2d 141
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 13, 1980·No. No. 78-644/T4-77·Published

Opinion

SHARP, Judge.

The appellant appeals his conviction of armed robbery. He was tried with Ulysses Holt, and the issues and facts of this ease are set forth in Holt v. State, 378 So.2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The State’s case against the appellant was somewhat stronger than that against Holt. However, because of the extent and nature of the rulings which truncated appellant’s right to cross-examine the key prosecution witness, Gwendolyn Tisdale, we reverse the conviction and remand for a new trial. Cowheard v. State, 365 So.2d 191 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1978); Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974).

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.

DAUKSCH, C. J., and COBB, J., concur.

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

Davis v. State, 379 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

379 So. 2d 1017 (Davis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. Alaska
415 U.S. 308 (Supreme Court, 1974)
Cowheard v. State
365 So. 2d 191 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
Holt v. State
378 So. 2d 106 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)