Nakia Simmons v. State of Florida

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: January 3, 2024
• Docket: 2022-1729
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

NAKIA SIMMONS, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

No. 4D2022-1729

[January 3, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Timothy L. Bailey, Judge; L.T. Case No. 19007785CF10A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Alan T. Lipson, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lindsay A. Warner, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Francis v. State, 808 So. 2d 110, 130 (Fla. 2001) (“It is well established that trial judges have broad discretion in deciding whether to read back testimony.”); Simmons v. State, 334 So. 2d 265, 266–67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (noting that a read-back taking seven hours was impractical); Castellon-Lopez v. State, 230 So. 3d 518, 519–20 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (concluding the trial court properly (1) explained to the jury it could get a read-back and (2) instructed the jury to “specify which portions of the testimony it wishe[d] to review,” and explaining that “[r]ather than misleading the jury into believing that read-backs are prohibited, the trial court specifically informed the jury that a read-back is permitted, and asked the jury to specify what portions of the testimony it would like to hear”).

MAY, DAMOORGIAN and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.