Sadler v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sadler v. State

509 So. 2d 1139, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1454

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 11, 1987

Docket86-1968

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 509 So. 2d 1139 (Sadler 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.

Bluebook

Sadler v. State, 509 So. 2d 1139, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1454 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

509 So.2d 1139 (1987)

Robert Henry SADLER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 86-1968.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

June 11, 1987. Rehearing Denied July 16, 1987.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Kenneth Witts, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and W. Brian Bayly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

COBB, Judge.

This case is directly controlled by our prior opinion in Deel v. State, 481 So.2d 15 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.2d 831 (Fla. 1986). See also, Baeza v. State, 489 So.2d 36 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 496 So.2d 142 (Fla. 1986). Here, as in Deel, the prosecution introduced expert medical testimony indicating that the hymen of the minor victim had been ruptured by sexual activity. The prosecution then successfully objected to proffered defense evidence which indicated that the injury (rupture) could have been caused by earlier sexual activity with a person other than the defendant. The exclusion of such rebuttal evidence contravenes both section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1985) and substantive due process of law, i.e., fair play.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and SHARP, J., concur.

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

509 So.2d 1139 (1987)

Robert Henry SADLER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 86-1968.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

June 11, 1987. Rehearing Denied July 16, 1987.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Kenneth Witts, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and W. Brian Bayly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

COBB, Judge.

This case is directly controlled by our prior opinion in Deel v. State, 481 So.2d 15 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.2d 831 (Fla. 1986). See also, Baeza v. State, 489 So.2d 36 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 496 So.2d 142 (Fla. 1986). Here, as in Deel, the prosecution introduced expert medical testimony indicating that the hymen of the minor victim had been ruptured by sexual activity. The prosecution then successfully objected to proffered defense evidence which indicated that the injury (rupture) could have been caused by earlier sexual activity with a person other than the defendant. The exclusion of such rebuttal evidence contravenes both section 794.022(2), Florida Statutes (1985) and substantive due process of law, i.e., fair play.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and SHARP, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

509 So. 2d 1139, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sadler-v-state-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Robert Henry SADLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Robert Henry SADLER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.