Testimonial Hearsay

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

• Quawn M. Franklin v. State
  965 So. 2d 79· Fla.· 2007-06-21 ·cited 147×
  Quawn Franklin was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the shooting death of Jerry Lawley during an attempted robbery. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, rejecting Franklin's challenges regarding confrontation clause viol
• Rodgers v. State
  948 So. 2d 655· Fla.· 2006-10-26 ·cited 131×
  Theodore Rodgers was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting his wife Teresa Henderson and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, rejecting challenges to jury selection, hearsay evidence, mental retardation findings, and the cons
• Russell v. State
  982 So. 2d 642· Fla.· 2008-05-01 ·cited 110×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Crawford v. Washington does not apply to probation revocation proceedings, and that hearsay evidence coupled with non-hearsay corroborating testimony (such as observation of injury) may support revocation of probation if the totality of circums
• Chandler v. Crosby
  916 So. 2d 728· Fla.· 2005-10-06 ·cited 55×
  Jim Eric Chandler, convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death, petitions for a writ of habeas corpus claiming that Crawford v. Washington, which established new confrontation clause protections for testimonial hearsay, requires reversal of his convictio
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Kramer
  778 F. Supp. 2d 1320· M.D. Fla.· 2011-04-01 ·cited 43×
  The court held that Baker's statements were inadmissible hearsay and granted Kramer's motion to exclude them. The court also sustained Kramer's objection to the magistrate judge's order denying his Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of the Commission.
• 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
• Belvin v. State
  922 So. 2d 1046· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-03-08 ·cited 39×
  Bruce Belvin challenges his DUI conviction based on the admission of a breath test affidavit without the opportunity to cross-examine the breath test technician. The Fourth District Court of Appeal grants certiorari, holding that portions of the breath test affidavit describing t
• State v. Moroni Lopez
  974 So. 2d 340· Fla.· 2008-01-10 ·cited 38×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a victim's testimonial statement identifying the defendant as possessing a firearm violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights under Crawford v. Washington, and that a discovery deposition conducted by defense counsel does not
• Peters v. State
  984 So. 2d 1227· Fla.· 2008-05-01 ·cited 32×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause rule established in Crawford v. Washington, which prohibits testimonial hearsay in criminal prosecutions without cross-examination opportunity, does not apply to probation or community control revocation
• Johnson v. State
  929 So. 2d 4· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-12-30 ·cited 32×
  Johnson was convicted of drug possession and related crimes based partly on an FDLE lab report admitted without the analyst's testimony. The court held that the lab report was testimonial hearsay under Crawford v. Washington and reversed the convictions because the analyst was av
• State v. Johnson
  982 So. 2d 672· Fla.· 2008-05-01 ·cited 28×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) lab report identifying seized substances is testimonial hearsay under Crawford v. Washington and cannot be admitted without the live testimony of the analyst who prepared it, even when offered as a
• Shiver v. State
  900 So. 2d 615· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-03-08 ·cited 28×
  Dennis Shiver appeals his DUI conviction, arguing that admission of breath test results via an affidavit violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation under Crawford v. Washington. The court agrees and reverses, holding that the affidavit contained testimonial hearsay regar
• Peters v. State
  919 So. 2d 624· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-01-24 ·cited 27×
  Peters challenges the admission of a laboratory drug test report at his community control revocation hearing, arguing it violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation under Crawford v. Washington. The court holds that Crawford does not apply to community control revocation
• Julian v. Desue, IV
  908 So. 2d 1116· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-07-25 ·cited 26×
  Desue challenges his armed robbery conviction and life sentence as a prison releasee reoffender, arguing that using Department of Corrections records to establish his release date violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation under Crawford v. Washington. The First District
• Marcelino Herreravega v. State
  888 So. 2d 66· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-10-22 ·cited 22×
  Marcelino Herrera-Vega appeals his conviction for capital sexual battery of a three-year-old victim. The court affirmed his conviction, holding that the victim's spontaneous statements to her parents were nontestimonial hearsay not subject to the confrontation clause restrictions
• State v. Damion J. Shearod
  992 So. 2d 900· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-10-24 ·cited 21×
  Florida appeals a trial court's post-verdict judgment of acquittal in a second-degree murder case. The appellate court reverses, finding the state established a prima facie case sufficient to survive the motion for acquittal, though it acknowledges serious evidentiary weaknesses
• Sproule v. State
  927 So. 2d 46· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-03-29 ·cited 20×
  Gary Sproule was convicted of Habitual Driving While License Revoked and challenged the admission of his driving record as hearsay and a violation of his Sixth Amendment confrontation rights under Crawford v. Washington. The Florida appellate court affirmed the conviction, holdin
• Card v. State
  927 So. 2d 200· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-04-28 ·cited 19×
  James Card was convicted of driving with a revoked license as a habitual offender. Card appealed, arguing that his driving record was testimonial hearsay that violated his Sixth Amendment confrontation rights under Crawford v. Washington. The court held that driving records are n
• Shennett v. State
  937 So. 2d 287· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-09-13 ·cited 13×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed Jermaine Shennett's convictions for attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools because the trial court admitted inadmissible testimonial hearsay in violation of the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause under Crawford v. Washin
• Pflieger v. State
  952 So. 2d 1251· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-04-11 ·cited 11×
  Annual inspection reports of breath testing instruments are non-testimonial and their admission into evidence does not violate the Confrontation Clause, even without the inspector testifying.
• State v. Brunel Hosty
  944 So. 2d 255· Fla.· 2006-11-09 ·cited 11×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Florida's hearsay exception for statements by mentally disabled adults, section 90.803(24), is constitutional as applied to nontestimonial statements made shortly after abuse, but unconstitutional as applied to testimonial statements made to la
• Brown v. State
  69 So. 3d 316· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-08-17 ·cited 9×
  Norman Brown appeals his convictions for first-degree murder, attempted armed robbery, and related charges, arguing the trial court erred in admitting hearsay statements made by co-defendant Kevin Miller to a third party describing Brown's participation in the crimes. The appella
• BOX v. State
  993 So. 2d 135· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-10-24 ·cited 9×
  Jerry Box appeals a restitution order imposed as part of his battery conviction sentence, arguing that hearsay evidence used at the restitution hearing violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation. The court holds that the Confrontation Clause does not apply to restitution
• United States v. Mikel Clotaire
  963 F.3d 1288· 11th Cir.· 2020-06-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that ATM surveillance photos, even if extracted or processed for clarity, are admissible business records and not testimonial hearsay, and that limitations on cross-examination and admission of certain emails were proper.
• Martin v. State
  936 So. 2d 1190· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-08-30 ·cited 8×
  Jermaine Martin was convicted of drug possession after an FDLE lab report identifying seized substances as contraband was admitted at trial without the testimony of the chemist who performed the analysis. The appellate court reversed, holding that under Crawford v. Washington, th
• Sobota v. State
  933 So. 2d 1277· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-07-28 ·cited 8×
  Jack Sobota was convicted of driving under the influence with serious bodily injury based on blood test results introduced through a toxicologist who did not perform the testing. The court reversed, holding that admitting test results from an analyst who did not conduct the testi
• State v. Ratner
  948 So. 2d 700· Fla.· 2007-01-11 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the Fourth District Court of Appeal's decision that it lacked jurisdiction to hear a certified nonfinal county court order. The Court held that district courts of appeal have discretionary jurisdiction over nonfinal orders certified as matters o
• Bartee v. State
  922 So. 2d 1065· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-03-17 ·cited 7×
  Charles Bartee was convicted of burglary, false imprisonment, and battery following an altercation with his ex-girlfriend. The Florida appellate court reversed the burglary conviction because the trial court violated Bartee's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights by admitting test
• 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
• Antoine Williams v. State
  947 So. 2d 694· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-02-07 ·cited 6×
  In this rehearing motion case, the Fourth District Court of Appeal vacated Antoine Williams's conviction for aggravated fleeing and eluding, attempted burglary, and leaving the scene of accidents, finding that the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause righ
• Jackson v. State
  931 So. 2d 1062· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-07-05 ·cited 6×
  Patricia Jackson appealed the revocation of her probation for aggravated battery, challenging the admission of a 911 tape and victim statement as hearsay and violating Crawford v. Washington. The Fourth District affirmed the revocation, holding that the 911 tape constituted an ex
• Johnson v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  132 F.4th 1309· 11th Cir.· 2025-03-25 ·cited 4×
  Admission of a medical report without the author's testimony did not violate the Confrontation Clause because the defendant cannot prove actual prejudice from the error.
• Williams v. State
  933 So. 2d 1283· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-07-28 ·cited 4×
  Dwayne Williams appealed his jury conviction for cocaine trafficking, cannabis possession, and DUI. The court affirmed the drug convictions but reversed the DUI conviction because the breath test affidavit was introduced by someone other than the technician who performed the test
• Corona v. State
  929 So. 2d 588· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-04-28 ·cited 4×
  Sergio Corona was convicted of capital sexual battery against his 11-year-old daughter based on hearsay statements made by the victim to police, which were admitted under the reliability standard of Ohio v. Roberts. Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Crawford v. Washi
• Trahn Bowens v. State
  80 So. 3d 1056· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-02-01 ·cited 3×
  Trahn Bowens appeals his strong-arm robbery conviction on two grounds: that a surreptitious recording of a conversation violated Crawford v. Washington, and that the trial court erred in denying a mistrial motion after the State referenced a BOLO. The Fourth District affirmed, ho
• Self v. State
  55 So. 3d 677· Fla. 5th DCA· 2011-02-25 ·cited 3×
  William Self petitioned for a writ of prohibition to prevent his criminal prosecution based on violation of Florida's speedy trial rule. The court granted the petition, holding that Self did not waive his speedy trial right by filing a Crawford objection to business records, and
• State v. Causey
  898 So. 2d 1096· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-03-24 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court's order barring child victim hearsay statements was erroneous because it misapplied the Confrontation Clause by requiring the defendant's presence at the time the statement was made, rather than just a prior opportunity to cross-examine.
• Johnson v. State
  117 So. 3d 1238· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-07-10 ·cited 2×
  Johnson appeals convictions for sexual battery with a deadly weapon, kidnapping, and lewd and lascivious molestation of a child, challenging the admission of DNA evidence and a rape treatment report when the examining physician did not testify. The court upheld the admission of t
• Cobb v. State
  16 So. 3d 207· Fla. 5th DCA· 2009-08-07 ·cited 2×
  Terrance Cobb was convicted of first-degree murder and theft in connection with an armed robbery. On appeal, Cobb challenged the admission of the victim's dying declarations to police officers, arguing they violated his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation under Crawford v. Was
• State v. Pinault
  933 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-08-02 ·cited 2×
  The trial court's order denying admission of child hearsay evidence is quashed because the Confrontation Clause does not bar admission of a statement when the declarant testifies at trial and is available for cross-examination.
• Rosario v. State
  175 So. 3d 843· Fla. 5th DCA· 2015-08-28 ·cited 1×
  The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal held that an autopsy report prepared pursuant to Florida Statutes chapter 406 constitutes testimonial hearsay under the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause, but found any error in its admission was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt bec
• Marshall v. State
  45 So. 3d 470· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-01-20 ·cited 1×
• Washington v. State
  18 So. 3d 1221· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-10-07 ·cited 1×
  Randy Washington was convicted of acting as an unlicensed contractor after the State introduced a 'certificate of non-licensure' from the Florida Licensing Division. The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that this certificate was a testimonial statement subject to the Confront
• United States v. Brown
  11th Cir.· 2026-09-09
  The district court did not commit plain error in allowing a DNA analyst to testify regarding DNA comparisons where the analyst independently reviewed and verified the work of other lab personnel, testified generally about the lab's standard procedures and practices rather than sp
• United States v. Beasley
  11th Cir.· 2025-12-02
  A pharmacist convicted of health-care fraud is not entitled to a new trial based on a co-conspirator's sentencing memorandum, and the district court did not err in admitting evidence of an uncharged theft or in refusing to compel immunity for a witness invoking the Fifth Amendmen
• Hightower v. Secretary, Ricky D. Dixon
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-09
  Timothy Hightower, a state prisoner convicted of cocaine trafficking offenses within 1,000 feet of a church, sought federal habeas relief challenging his conviction on grounds that the trial court improperly denied severance of separate charges, that a detective's testimony regar
• v. ID. No. 1705014681 Elder Saavedra
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2025-08-13
  The Court recommended the summary dismissal of the defendant's motion for postconviction relief. The Court found that most of the defendant's claims were procedurally barred due to untimeliness, prior adjudication, or procedural default. For the claims that were not procedurally
• Bennett v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-11-30
  The appellate court held that admitting a toxicology report without the author's testimony violated the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause. However, the conviction was affirmed because the defendant's objection at trial was only for hearsay, not a specific Confrontation Clause
• Joel v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2019-09-27
  The court held that the defendant's claims were procedurally barred or defaulted, and his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel failed to meet the required legal standard.
• 2018 AP 32 A O opinion
  9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.· 2019-09-11
  The State of Florida appealed a trial court's order granting a defendant's motion in limine to exclude a certified driver's license record from the DAVID system. The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court reversed, holding that certified driving records are self-authenticating under Florid