Washington v. State
936 So. 2d 31, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 10960, 2006 WL 1788471
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Washington v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 206 →
Opinion
Affirmed. See Card v. State, 927 So.2d 200, 203 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (holding that, in a prosecution for driving while license revoked as a habitual traffic offender, a certified copy of the defendant’s driving record is not testimonial hearsay and thus the record’s admission did not implicate the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to confrontation under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004)); Sproule v. State, 927 So.2d 46, 47 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (same).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Washington v. State, 936 So. 2d 31, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 10960, 2006 WL 1788471 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).
936 So. 2d 31 (Washington 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)
Card v. State
927 So. 2d 200 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)
Sproule v. State
927 So. 2d 46 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)