Bowles v. State, 78-2219

Citation381 So.2d 326
Decision Date19 March 1980
Docket NumberNo. 78-2219,78-2219
PartiesCraig R. BOWLES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. /T4-251.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, Tatjana Ostapoff, Chief, Appellate Division, Asst. Public Defender, Denise Banjavic, Legal Intern, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Kenneth G. Spillias, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, and Edward M. Chew, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

ORFINGER, Judge.

Bowles appeals his conviction of attempted sexual battery, trespass and assault after a jury trial, and the consequent sentence thereon.

The victim testified that appellant, whom she knew, entered her apartment through an open window while she was asleep, physically assaulted her and attempted to forcibly rape her. She stated that she struggled with him, called out hoping one of her neighbors would hear her, and during the struggle scratched the appellant and was bitten by him. She testified that appellant finally tired of the struggle grabbed up his clothes and ran out the back door of the apartment. The neighbor testified that she was awake and heard the commotion, heard the victim shout to her to call the police, heard the victim say "Craig (appellant's first name) get out of my house" several times and heard a male voice which she identified as appellant's.

The arresting officer testified that when he went to appellant's house about an hour after the incident, there were fresh, bleeding scratches on appellant's face and body. Appellant, testifying in his own behalf, admitted being in the apartment earlier that evening, although he said that he was there for a few minutes and left without incident. He denied the victim's allegations, denied the attack and denied the presence of scratches, or other marks on his face or body when arrested. As rebuttal, the State produced four police officers, each of whom testified without objection that they knew the general reputation of appellant in the community for truth and veracity, and that it was bad. Then, over objection, each was asked if he would believe the appellant under oath and each answered in the negative. Appellant argues that permitting a witness, and particularly four witnesses, to testify that they would not believe appellant under oath is prejudicial error in that the testimony invades the province of the jury which is the sole judge of the credibility of a witness and that the error is compounded by using police officers for that purpose. We agree and reverse.

Section 90.08, Florida Statutes (1977), permits the introduction into evidence of the general reputation of a witness to affect his credibility. It is clear that in a criminal prosecution when a defendant testifies his credibility can be tested in the same manner as with any other witness. Lebowitz v. State, 313 So.2d 473 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); 81 Am.Jur.2d Witnesses, § 523. Long ago, the Supreme Court of Florida held that a witness could not be asked if the defendant was worthy of belief in the case after that witness had testified as to defendant's general...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • State v. Engesser
    • United States
    • South Dakota Supreme Court
    • April 23, 2003
    ...or misleading the jury] because of its aura of special reliability and trust-worthiness") (citations omitted). See also, Bowles v. Florida, 381 So.2d 326, 328 (1980) (noting, "[p]olice officers, by virtue of their positions, rightfully bring with their testimony an air of authority and legi......
  • State v. Paul
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 6, 1994
    ...So.2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), rev. denied, 447 So.2d 888 (Fla.1984); State v. Garcia, 431 So.2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Bowles v. State, 381 So.2d 326 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). ...
  • Gamble v. State, 92-2972
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 14, 1994
    ...The error in admitting this evidence was not harmless. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986). See also Bowles v. State, 381 So.2d 326 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). W. SHARP, Judge, I respectfully dissent. In my view, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it permitted Agent Rocque ......
  • Boatwright v. State, 82-2033
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 18, 1984
    ...of the jury's exclusive province for one witness to offer his personal view on the credibility of a fellow witness. Bowles v. State, 381 So.2d 326 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Moreover, the fact that two witnesses disagree does not necessarily establish that one is lying. Lying is the making of a f......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT