Miller v. State

440 So. 2d 459, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 23456
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Miller v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 411 So. 2d 944
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 2, 1983·No. No. 83-690·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm, finding no reversible error by the trial court in declining to allow the appellant to question a prosecution witness about his prior juvenile record. First, since no proffer was made we have no way of evaluating appellant’s claim. In addition, we note that the trial court allowed great latitude in the questioning of this particular witness, who acknowledged that he was testifying against the appellant for the specific purpose of getting more lenient treatment from the state for his own involvement in the same crime charged against the appellant. Under these circumstances we do not believe the case of Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974) mandates reversal.

ANSTEAD, C.J., and DOWNEY and HERSEY, *JJ., concur.

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

Miller v. State, 440 So. 2d 459, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 23456 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

440 So. 2d 459 (Miller v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. Alaska
415 U.S. 308 (Supreme Court, 1974)