Page v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Page v. State

436 So. 2d 153, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 27768

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 16, 1983·No. No. 82-1180·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.

We reverse on authority of Hall v. Oakley, 409 So.2d 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). However, we find the issue raised in Hall and this case concerning impeachment of a defendant to be a question of great public importance. We therefore certify the following question pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution (1972):

WHETHER THE STATE IS PREVENTED BY SECTION 90.610(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (1981), FROM IMPEACHING A DEFENDANT BY USE OF A PRIOR PETIT THEFT CONVICTION WITHOUT SHOWING THAT SUCH CRIME INVOLVES SOME ELEMENT OF DECEIT, UNTRUTHFULNESS, OR FALSIFICATION BEARING UPON THE DEFENDANT’S CAPACITY TO TESTIFY TRUTHFULLY.

DANAHY and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.

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

HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.

We reverse on authority of Hall v. Oakley, 409 So.2d 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). However, we find the issue raised in Hall and this case concerning impeachment of a defendant to be a question of great public importance. We therefore certify the following question pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution (1972):

WHETHER THE STATE IS PREVENTED BY SECTION 90.610(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (1981), FROM IMPEACHING A DEFENDANT BY USE OF A PRIOR PETIT THEFT CONVICTION WITHOUT SHOWING THAT SUCH CRIME INVOLVES SOME ELEMENT OF DECEIT, UNTRUTHFULNESS, OR FALSIFICATION BEARING UPON THE DEFENDANT’S CAPACITY TO TESTIFY TRUTHFULLY.

DANAHY and SCHOONOVER, JJ., concur.

Page v. State, 436 So. 2d 153, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 27768 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

436 So. 2d 153 (Page v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related