Face-To-Face Confrontation

21 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• State v. Contreras
  979 So. 2d 896· Fla.· 2008-03-13 ·cited 41×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a child sexual abuse victim's testimonial videotaped statement to a Child Protection Team coordinator violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause rights under Crawford v. Washington because the defendant lacked a prior opportu
• State v. Ford
  626 So. 2d 1338· Fla.· 1993-11-10 ·cited 37×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that while a trial court may employ procedures not expressly authorized by law to protect child witnesses from trauma, the videotaped testimony of a four-year-old witness in a homicide case violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation righ
• United States v. Benfield
  593 F.2d 815· 8th Cir.· 1979-03-08 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was violated by the procedures used during the videotaped deposition of a key witness, where the defendant was excluded from the witness's vision and unaware of the defendant's presence.
• United States v. Kelly
  892 F.2d 255· 3d Cir.· 1989-12-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that admitting videotaped depositions of unavailable foreign witnesses, taken with defense counsel present and a phone line for consultation, did not violate the Confrontation Clause. The court also held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction de
• Harrell v. State
  689 So. 2d 400· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-03-05 ·cited 14×
  David Harrell was convicted of robbery, burglary, and assault based partly on live satellite testimony from two victims testifying from Argentina. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that satellite testimony does not violate the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Cl
• Allison v. State
  661 So. 2d 889· Fla. 2d DCA· 1995-10-11 ·cited 10×
  Michael Jude Allison was convicted of second-degree murder in the death of his former wife and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Florida appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial due to the erroneous admission of hearsay statements from child witnesses, finding that
• Contreras v. State
  910 So. 2d 901· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-09-14 ·cited 7×
  Rodolfo Contreras was convicted of sexual battery and lewd and lascivious molestation of his daughter based primarily on a videotaped ex parte statement taken by a Child Protection Team (CPT). The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the CPT statement constitute
• Sigmon v. State
  622 So. 2d 57· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-07-19 ·cited 6×
  Anthony Sigmon appeals his sexual battery conviction, challenging the admission of the child victim's videotaped testimony given outside his presence. The court affirms the conviction but certifies to the Florida Supreme Court the question of whether the trial court's failure to
• J.T.B. v. State
  345 So. 3d 927· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-29 ·cited 2×
  This case addresses whether juvenile delinquency hearings conducted remotely via videoconferencing violate a juvenile's due process right to confrontation. The court held that such remote proceedings require case-specific findings of necessity to justify denying in-person confron
• Disinger v. State
  569 So. 2d 824· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-11-01 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief, finding that while the use of a screen obscuring the defendant's view of witnesses might violate the Sixth Amendment, such an issue should have been raised on direct appeal and was not grounds for post-conviction
• D.S. v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-29
  The court held that juvenile delinquency adjudicatory hearings conducted remotely via videoconferencing, without case-specific findings of necessity, violate a juvenile's due process right to confrontation. The court reversed the delinquency findings and remanded for new hearings
• W.B. v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-29
  Four juveniles appealed delinquency adjudications conducted remotely via videoconferencing during the COVID-19 pandemic without case-specific findings of necessity. The Third District Court of Appeal held that due process protections, including the right to confrontation, require
• F.L. v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-29
  This case addresses whether juvenile delinquency hearings conducted remotely via videoconferencing violate a juvenile's due process right to confrontation. The court held that such remote appearances require case-specific findings of necessity to ensure fundamental fairness and r
• Butler v. State
  254 So. 3d 651· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-09-20
  James R. Butler appeals his conviction for two counts of sexual battery on a person less than 12 years of age, challenging the trial court's decision to allow the victim to testify via satellite video transmission from Australia. The court affirms the conviction and the use of sa
• Hernandez v. State
  626 So. 2d 1349· Fla.· 1993-11-10
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court may admit child witness testimony via one-way closed-circuit television in non-abuse cases when there is a case-specific finding of severe emotional harm and sufficient indicia of reliability, without violating the defendant's Six
• Vernell Carson v. Collins
  993 F.2d 461· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-08
  The court held that the admission of a videotaped statement did not violate the Confrontation Clause because the victim testified at trial and was subject to cross-examination, and that the admission of the videotape and witness remarks did not render the trial fundamentally unfa
• Thomas v. Gunter
  962 F.2d 1477· 10th Cir.· 1992-04-28
  The court held that admitting videotaped depositions of child victims did not violate the appellant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, as the procedures met the standards set forth in Maryland v. Craig.
• Fricke v. State
  561 So. 2d 597· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-04-03
  William Fricke appeals his conviction for sexual battery and lewd and lascivious assault of a six-year-old child. The court reverses and remands because the trial court violated Fricke's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation by allowing the child victim to testify via closed-cir