NEFTALI DEJESUS
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
In a bench trial, there is a rebuttable presumption that the trial court disregarded any erroneously admitted evidence, and this error is deemed harmless unless the appellant shows the trial court actually relied on the improper evidence.
[1] In a bench trial, a trial judge is presumed to have disregarded erroneously admitted evidence, and such error is harmless unless the appellant demonstrates that the trial…
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 intelligence“if a trial judge receives evidence as the finder of fact and hears inadmissible evidence, such as through a suppression hearing, a proffer, a motion in limine, or prior to sustaining an objection to the evidence, the judge is generally presumed to have disregarded the improper evidence”
From Petion v. State, explaining the presumption applied in bench trials regarding inadmissible evidence
Neftali DeJesus appealed a judgment from a bench trial in Miami-Dade County. The trial court received evidence that was allegedly improper.…
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.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Petion v. State, 48 So. 3d 726, 730 (Fla. 2010) (acknowledging that in a nonjury case there is a rebuttable presumption that the trial court based its decision upon admissible evidence and disregarded any inadmissible evidence; “if a trial judge receives evidence as the finder of fact and hears inadmissible evidence, such as through a suppression hearing, a proffer, a motion in limine, or prior to sustaining an objection to the evidence, the judge is generally presumed to have disregarded the improper evidence. Therefore, any error in the trial judge's exposure to this improper evidence is deemed harmless”; further, where the trial court, sitting as factfinder, makes an express statement on the record that erroneously admitted evidence was not considered or did not contribute to the court’s decision, any error in the admission of that evidence will ordinarily be presumed harmless, in the absence of a showing that the trial court actually relied upon the erroneous evidence in reaching its determination); King v. State, 988 So. 2d 111, 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (noting that “in a bench trial, there is a presumption that the trial court disregards any erroneously admitted evidence” and further noting that the trial court “specifically stated that it was not considering testimony other than that directly related to the murder”).
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Petion v. State, 48 So. 3d 726 (Fla. 2010)
- Tremayne King v. State, 988 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)