Garmon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Garmon v. State

519 So. 2d 685, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 295, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 358, 1988 WL 6399

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 29, 1988

DocketNo. BP-476

StatusPublished

This text of 519 So. 2d 685 (Garmon 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

Garmon v. State, 519 So. 2d 685, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 295, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 358, 1988 WL 6399 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

ERVIN, Judge.

The appellant seeks review of his conviction for first degree murder, use of a firearm in commission of a felony, shooting within a building, and carrying a concealed firearm, contending that the trial court reversibly erred in precluding the defense from introducing a taped statement made by the appellant to police officers one and one-half hours after the victim was killed. We hold that the statement sought to be introduced was inadmissible hearsay and does not fall within the “state of mind” exception as argued by the appellant. See United States v. Ponticelli, 622 F.2d 985 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1016, 101 S.Ct. 578, 66 L.Ed.2d 476 (1980); Section 90.803(3)(b), Florida Statutes.

AFFIRMED.

SMITH, C.J., and NIMMONS, J., concur.

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

ERVIN, Judge.

The appellant seeks review of his conviction for first degree murder, use of a firearm in commission of a felony, shooting within a building, and carrying a concealed firearm, contending that the trial court reversibly erred in precluding the defense from introducing a taped statement made by the appellant to police officers one and one-half hours after the victim was killed. We hold that the statement sought to be introduced was inadmissible hearsay and does not fall within the “state of mind” exception as argued by the appellant. See United States v. Ponticelli, 622 F.2d 985 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1016, 101 S.Ct. 578, 66 L.Ed.2d 476 (1980); Section 90.803(3)(b), Florida Statutes.

AFFIRMED.

SMITH, C.J., and NIMMONS, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

519 So. 2d 685, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 295, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 358, 1988 WL 6399, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garmon-v-state-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack