Ingvaldsen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ingvaldsen v. State

539 So. 2d 613, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 723, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1416, 1989 WL 24741

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 22, 1989

DocketNo. 87-2274

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 539 So. 2d 613 (Ingvaldsen 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

Ingvaldsen v. State, 539 So. 2d 613, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 723, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1416, 1989 WL 24741 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After being fully apprised of his right to remain silent the appellant — voluntarily and intelligently — gave an eighteen-page detailed confession stating that he offered Larry Turner $100,000 to assassinate two judges who had issued rulings adverse to his father in state court criminal proceedings. The confession was corroborated by Turner who was the state’s main witness.

Ingvaldsen’s main issue on the challenge to the conviction is that he was unfairly prejudiced by evidence, admitted under the “Williams rule,” that he had previously solicited others to arrange a prison escape for his father.

Any unfair prejudice caused to the appellant by the improper admission of “other crimes” evidence, section 90.404(2), Florida Statutes (1987), was indeed harmless. In making the harmless error analysis we have examined the entire record to include a close examination of the impermissible evidence which might have influenced the jury verdict, and conclude that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction. Ciccarelli v. State, 531 So.2d 129 (Fla.1988). The confession, voluntarily and intelligently given, and independently corroborated, would have supported the same result.

No reversible error is demonstrated by the remaining points on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., BASKIN, NATALIE, and FERGUSON, WILKIE D., Jr., Associate Judges, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

After being fully apprised of his right to remain silent the appellant — voluntarily and intelligently — gave an eighteen-page detailed confession stating that he offered Larry Turner $100,000 to assassinate two judges who had issued rulings adverse to his father in state court criminal proceedings. The confession was corroborated by Turner who was the state’s main witness.

Ingvaldsen’s main issue on the challenge to the conviction is that he was unfairly prejudiced by evidence, admitted under the “Williams rule,” that he had previously solicited others to arrange a prison escape for his father.

Any unfair prejudice caused to the appellant by the improper admission of “other crimes” evidence, section 90.404(2), Florida Statutes (1987), was indeed harmless. In making the harmless error analysis we have examined the entire record to include a close examination of the impermissible evidence which might have influenced the jury verdict, and conclude that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction. Ciccarelli v. State, 531 So.2d 129 (Fla.1988). The confession, voluntarily and intelligently given, and independently corroborated, would have supported the same result.

No reversible error is demonstrated by the remaining points on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., BASKIN, NATALIE, and FERGUSON, WILKIE D., Jr., Associate Judges, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

539 So. 2d 613, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 723, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 1416, 1989 WL 24741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ingvaldsen-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack