Logan v. State
This text of 705 So. 2d 140 (Logan 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.
Opinion
Candido Logan appeals his conviction for resisting arrest without violence, contending that the trial court improperly admitted collateral and wholly irrelevant evidence of prior acts of violence which were highly prejudicial and thus reversal is required in accordance with Williams v. State, 110 So.2d 654 (Fla.1959). We disagree and thus affirm.
The evidence Logan challenges is a document — an “ex parte temporary injunction for protection against domestic violence pursuant to section 741.30, Florida Statutes,”— which a law enforcement officer was attempting to serve when he was allegedly battered by Logan. The charges tried included resisting an officer with violence in violation of section 843.01, Florida Statutes (1995),1 an [141]*141element of which is the officer’s being engaged in the lawful execution of a duty. Smith v. State, 399 So.2d 70 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). The document is thus relevant as it demonstrates and helps explain the lawful duty being carried out. As a consequence, the document is not violative of the Williams rule and was properly admitted into evidence.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
705 So. 2d 140, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 1134, 1998 WL 51568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/logan-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.