Fuentes v. State

727 So. 2d 275, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1296, 1999 WL 68524
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 10, 1999
DocketNo. 97-2640
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 727 So. 2d 275 (Fuentes 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
Fuentes v. State, 727 So. 2d 275, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1296, 1999 WL 68524 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm defendant’s conviction and sentence finding no error in the trial court’s denial of the suppression motion. Bruno v. State, 574 So.2d 76 (Fla.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 834, 112 S.Ct. 112, 116 L.Ed.2d 81 (1991). In so doing, we hold that Thompson v. State, 705 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), is inapplicable. Even if we were persuaded that admission of testimony based on documents that were not in evidence under the business records hearsay exception is error, any such error is harmless in light of the defendant’s confession and the overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Conner v. State
910 So. 2d 313 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Kumbhojkar v. University of Miami
727 So. 2d 275 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
727 So. 2d 275, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1296, 1999 WL 68524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fuentes-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.