Freundlich v. State

636 So. 2d 590, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4590, 1994 WL 182731
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 13, 1994·No. No. 93-1804·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Although the trial court allowed two proffered hearsay statements of the child-victim to be used at Freundlich’s sexual battery trial, plus the child’s own testimony, there is no apparent reversible error demonstrated. Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla.1992). Compliance with the requirements of section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes, was satisfactory in this case. See State v. Townsend, 635 So.2d 949 (Fla.1994).

AFFIRMED.

COBB, W. SHARP and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

Freundlich v. State, 636 So. 2d 590, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4590, 1994 WL 182731 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

636 So. 2d 590 (Freundlich v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Broad and Cassel v. Newport Motel, Inc.
636 So. 2d 590 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)