EGIL INGVALDSEN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for soliciting murder of judges, finding that any prejudicial admission of prior bad acts evidence was harmless error given the defendant's detailed voluntary confession and corroborating witness testimony.
Admission of evidence regarding prior solicitation of a prison escape was harmless error where the defendant's voluntary and detailed confession was independently corroborated by the state's main witness.
[1] Evidence of prior bad acts admitted under the Williams rule is harmless error when the defendant's voluntary and corroborated confession independently supports the convic…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIngvaldsen voluntarily gave an eighteen-page detailed confession stating he offered Larry Turner $100,000 to assassinate two judges who had issued adv…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Other Crimes Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After being fully apprised of his right to remain silent the appellant — voluntarily and intelligently — gave an eighteen-page detailed confession stating that he offered Larry Turner $100,000 to assassinate two judges who had issued rulings adverse to his father in state court criminal proceedings. The confession was corroborated by Turner who was the state’s main witness.
Ingvaldsen’s main issue on the challenge to the conviction is that he was unfairly prejudiced by evidence, admitted under the “Williams rule,” that he had previously solicited others to arrange a prison escape for his father. Any unfair prejudice caused to the appellant by the improper admission of “other crimes” evidence, section 90.404(2), Florida Statutes (1987), was indeed harmless. In making the harmless error analysis we have examined the entire record to include a close examination of the impermissible evidence which might have influenced the jury verdict, and conclude that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction. Ciccarelli v. State, 531 So. 2d 129 (Fla.1988). The confession, voluntarily and intelligently given, and independently corroborated, would have supported the same result.
No reversible error is demonstrated by the remaining points on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., BASKIN, NATALIE, and FERGUSON, WILKIE D., Jr., Associate Judges, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A.M. v. State, 574 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…rt of the doctor’s statement which simply echoed the in-court testimony of the girls and their mother that the defendant was the assailant. Begley v. State, 483 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); see also Ciccarelli, 531 So. 2d 129; Ingvaldsen v. State, 539 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). Affirmed. HUBBART and FERGUSON, JJ., concur. . She is also A.M.’s sister and adopted mother. . Section 90.803(4), includes as a hearsay exception: Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment by a person s…
Authorities Cited
- Ciccarelli v. State, 531 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1988)