MARILYN RANGEL, APPELLANT,

v.

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Chanard Randrell Green v. State, 160 So. 3d 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
  …endant was arrested in a high crime area is generally inadmissible [because] [s]uch evidence is usually considered irrelevant to the issue of guilt and unduly prejudicial because of its tendency to establish guilt by association.” Latimore v. State, 819 So. 2d 956, 958 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (citing Johnson v. State, 559 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), and Beneby v. State, 354 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)). However, in Gillion v. State, 573 So. 2d 810, 811 (Fla.1991), the Florida Supreme Court held that testimo…
• Lucier v. State, 189 So. 3d 161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)
  …1140, 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (“Florida law disapproves references to the area in which a defendant is observed as a location known to be a place •where drugs are sold because such evidence is. irrelevant to the issue of guilt.”); Latimore v. State, 819 So. 2d 956, 958 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (“[Ejvidence that a criminal defendant was arrested in a high crime area is generally inadmissible . [because] [s]uch evidence is usually considered irrelevant to the issue of guilt and unduly prejudicial...,”); Jordan v. St…
• J.R. v. State, 273 So. 3d 111 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
  …tends that the admission of testimony characterizing the area as known for narcotics sales was improper. We agree. “In Florida, evidence that a criminal defendant was arrested in a high crime area is generally inadmissible.” Latimore v. State, 819 So. 2d 956, 958 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). “Such evidence is usually considered irrelevant to the issue of guilt and unduly prejudicial because of its tendency to establish guilt by association.” Id.; see also Fleurimond v. State, 10 So. 3d 1140, 1146 (Fla. 3d…

Authorities Cited

• White v. Steak & ALE OF Fla., Inc., 816 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2002)