Mixon v. State

899 So. 2d 496, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 5423, 2005 WL 900621
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 20, 2005·No. No. 1D04-0787·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s conviction is AFFIRMED. The error, if any, in admitting the victim’s out-of-court statement to Deputy Bates, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. A harmless error analysis applies to the recent United States Supreme Court decision of Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004). See, e.g., United States v. Rodriguez-Marrero, 390 F.3d 1, 17-18 (1st Cir.2004); United States v. Jones, 393 F.3d 107, 109 (2d Cir.2004); United States v. Robinson, 389 F.3d 582, 593 (6th Cir.2004); United States v. Gilbert, 391 F.3d 882, 884 (7th Cir.2004); Williams v. United States, 858 A.2d 978, 981 (D.C.2004); Porter v. State, 278 Ga. 694, 606 S.E.2d 240, 243 (2004); Vigil v. State, 98 P.3d 172, 179 (Wyo.2004); [497] Somervell v. State, 883 So.2d 836, 839 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

ERVIN, KAHN and BENTON, JJ., concur.

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

Mixon v. State, 899 So. 2d 496, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 5423, 2005 WL 900621 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

899 So. 2d 496 (Mixon v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Crawford v. Washington
541 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Christopher Robinson
389 F.3d 582 (Sixth Circuit, 2004)
United States v. Stanley Gilbert
391 F.3d 882 (Seventh Circuit, 2004)
Porter v. State
606 S.E.2d 240 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Somervell v. State
883 So. 2d 836 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Williams v. United States
858 A.2d 978 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2004)
Vigil v. State
2004 WY 110 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Rodriguez-Marrero
390 F.3d 1 (First Circuit, 2004)