Toomer v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Toomer v. State

599 So. 2d 780, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6845, 1992 WL 131897

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 16, 1992

DocketNo. 91-3024

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 599 So. 2d 780 (Toomer 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

Toomer v. State, 599 So. 2d 780, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6845, 1992 WL 131897 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ira Toomer appeals his conviction and sentence for attempted robbery and attempted battery. We affirm.

It was, as the defense contends, impermissible for the State to ask a witness if another witness is lying. Mosley v. State, 569 So.2d 832 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Whitfield v. State, 549 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Boatwright v. State, 452 So.2d 666 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). The objection was correctly sustained, and there was no abuse of discretion in the denial of the motion for mistrial.

While the detective’s testimony exceeded to some degree that which is permitted by State v. Baird, 572 So.2d 904, 908 (Fla.1990), there was no objection to the statement about which defendant now complains. In view of the unobjected-to testimony, the solitary objected-to statement was cumulative.

Affirmed.

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