Garvey v. State

754 So. 2d 130, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3407, 2000 WL 293831
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 22, 2000·No. No. 3D99-2179·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The conviction below for aggravated battery with a knife is reversed for a new trial because the prosecutor improperly asked the defendant on cross-examination whether it was “true that you also have cut [another person] with a knife.” See Harris v. State, 427 So.2d 234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Ruiz v. State, 395 So.2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), review denied, 407 So.2d 1106 (Fla.1981); Donaldson v. State, 369 So.2d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Cornatezer v. State, 736 So.2d 1217 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Cooper v. State, 659 So.2d 442 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Freeman v. State, 630 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). We reject the state’s arguments that only harmless error was involved and that the impropriety could be negated by a curative instruction. Harris, 427 So.2d at 234; Ruiz, 395 So.2d at 566.

Reversed.

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

Garvey v. State, 754 So. 2d 130, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3407, 2000 WL 293831 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

754 So. 2d 130 (Garvey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brooks v. State
868 So. 2d 643 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Ousley v. State
763 So. 2d 1256 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)