Rodriguez, 36 FLW 1517, 4th DCA, Impeachment, prior inconsistent statement - Trial court erred in refusing to allow testimony that the victim told detective he did not know who shot him, after the victim testified on cross-exam that defendant shot him, and he did not remember telling the detective he did not know who shot him. When a witness at trial does not remember earlier inconsistent statement, the witness does not "distinctly admit making" the statement under 90.614(2) and therefore extrinsic evidence of it is admissible - harmless error here where victim was heavily sedated at the time of the previous statement and defendant told officer he killed the victim. The gun used in shooting linked to defendant and all eyewitnesses gave descriptions of the shooter that matched the defendant.
B.C., 36 FLW 1532, 1st DCA, Trespass no school grounds - Deputy who said he was a school board police officer and did not have authority to exclude children inasmuch as deputy was not under the command of the school principal. There being no connection between the deputy and principal's office, the essential element of 810.097(2), the conviction constituted fundamental error - conflict certified. There was a similar case last week.
The Law Offices of Roger P. Foley,P.A.