Willinsky v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Willinsky v. State

328 So. 2d 536, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14908

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 9, 1976

DocketNo. 75-942

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 328 So. 2d 536 (Willinsky 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

Willinsky v. State, 328 So. 2d 536, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14908 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was found guilty by a jury of the sale or delivery of a controlled substance, cocaine. The point of this ap[537]*537peal is the alleged error of the trial court in allowing the following question and answer during cross-examination:

“Q. Mr. Willinsky, you never told anybody at the preliminary hearing this story, did you?

“A. I never had a chance to testify in my preliminary hearing, but the young lady was there, in fact, Miss Danzinger.”

The error, if any exists, does not clearly appear because the record does not show an objection, motion to strike or motion for mistrial. Nevertheless, we do not decide the case on that basis because it is apparent that if error did arise during cross-examination, it was harmless. See Fla.Stat. § 924.33, and Corbin v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 259 So.2d 543.

Affirmed.

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