SCOTT DOUGLAS FLORIO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse State V. Diguilio Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial. The appellant was prosecuted for a drug transaction set up by an informant and defended on the grounds that he and his girlfriend were entrapped by the informant into securing the cocaine for the transaction. The state concedes that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay evidence, over objection, referring to a witness’s out-of-court conversation with the informant in which the informant stated that the appellant’s codefendant-girlfriend had previously said that she could supply cocaine to the informant. We cannot conclude that the error was harmless under the strict test set out in State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla.1986).
In addition, although we find no error in the trial court’s ruling that a police officer could properly describe the circumstances of the drug transaction and the appellant’s conduct and demeanor, it would not be proper for the officer to express an opinion, based upon the appellant’s demeanor, as to whether the appellant had sold drugs before. Finally, we reject appellant’s claim that the prosecuting attorney made an improper argument to the jury.
ANSTEAD, DELL and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cooper v. State, 573 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…ying the informant with cocaine, was reversible error because the information was not ambiguous and curative instruction would not have rendered it harmless. Id. at 325. See also Ralston v. State, 555 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Florio v. State, 554 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Baird v. State, 553 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Cf. Smith v. State, 554 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Allen v. State, 474 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 484 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1986). In this case, after examinati…
-
Henderson v. State, 789 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…See, e.g., Baskin v. State, 732 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding that testimony concerning general criminal behavior [*1018] based on a law enforcement officer’s experience and investigation in other cases is inadmissible); Florio v. State, 554 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (noting that while a police officer can properly describe his direct observations, his opinion based on those observations as to whether the defendant had sold drugs before is impermissible). Thus, the only question we must answe…
Authorities Cited
- State v. DiGUILIO, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986)