Frazier v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Frazier v. State

216 So. 2d 264, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 4695

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 10, 1968

DocketNo. 68-115

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 216 So. 2d 264 (Frazier 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

Frazier v. State, 216 So. 2d 264, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 4695 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

NATHAN, RAYMOND G., Associate Judge.

Appellant seeks review of his conviction of the crime of robbery pursuant to a non-jury trial.

Appellant contends (1) that the State failed to establish a prima facie case of robbery against him on the ground that the identification of him by eye witnesses was unsatisfactory and (2) that the trial court committed error in permitting the police officer to testify that an alleged identification of the defendant had been made during the course of the officer’s investigation when such testimony, as to the appellant, was hearsay.

The evidence discloses that the witnesses made positive and unequivocal identification under circumstances which gave such witnesses ample opportunity to make and establish such identification. Therefore, there was substantial competent evidence to sustain the findings of the trial court.

The second point raised by the appellant is without merit as the objectionable hearsay was entirely cumulative and repetitious of other testimony in the record and thus harmless error. See Fla.Stat. 924.33 F.S.A., Urga v. State, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 719.

Affirmed.

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