Houston v. State, 77-470
| Decision Date | 11 July 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-470,77-470 |
| Citation | 360 So.2d 468 |
| Parties | Nathaniel HOUSTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Beth C. Weitzner, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before PEARSON, NATHAN and KEHOE, JJ.
Appellant, defendant below, appeals a judgment of conviction entered pursuant to a jury verdict on the charges of robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. We reverse.
In his second point on appeal, appellant contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence certain photographs which were clearly and unmistakably police "mugshots," in violation of his right to a fair and impartial trial.
It is conceded that the admission of the "mugshots" was error; however, appellee contends that it was harmless error.
Our review of the record in this case leads us to the conclusion that the introduction of the photographs, clearly identifiable in this case as "mugshots" and showing a date prior to the date of the crimes charged in this matter, into evidence constituted reversible error. See, e. g., United States v. Harrington, 490 F.2d 487 (2d Cir. 1973); Barnes v. United States, 124 U.S.App.D.C. 318, 365 F.2d 509 (1966); Williams v. State, 110 So.2d 654 (Fla.1959); and Mancebo v. State, 350 So.2d 1098 (Fla.3d DCA 1977). Compare State v. Rucker, 330 So.2d 470 (Fla.1976). We note, however, that if the photographs are properly cropped this objection could be alleviated.
Appellant in his first point on appeal contends that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on (1) aggravated assault and (2) simple assault, as lesser included offenses of armed robbery, where the information alleged and the evidence established the elements required to make the giving of such instructions mandatory.
Our review of the record also leads us to the conclusion that the instructions requested by appellant were within category four of the instructions outlined by the Supreme Court of Florida in Brown v. State, 206 So.2d 377 (Fla.1968) (hereinafter cited as Brown ). Having met the test announced in Brown, it was error for the trial court not to give the requested instructions; however, because of our determination above of appellant's second point on appeal, it is unnecessary for us to determine whether this error was harmless or reversible. See State v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
D'Anna v. State
...error. Whitehead v. State, 279 So.2d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973); Mancebo v. State, 350 So.2d 1098 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Houston v. State, 360 So.2d 468 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). This is so because "an accused's right to a fair and impartial jury is violated when the jury is improperly made aware of [a] ......
-
Taylor v. State, 53930
...required anything suggestive that the individuals in the photographs were convicts was covered or excluded. In Houston v. State, 360 So.2d 468, 469 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1978), the Florida court considered this question and indicated that the photographs would not have been objectionable had the......
-
Fuster v. State, 85-719
...1985); Duncan v. State, 450 So.2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); see Betsy v. State, 368 So.2d 436 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); cf. Houston v. State, 360 So.2d 468 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). Police possession of such photographs alone does not necessarily convey to the jury that a defendant has committed prior o......
-
Jackson v. State, 91-1061
...prison." See McGuire v. State, 584 So.2d 89 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); McCall v. State, 463 So.2d 425 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Houston v. State, 360 So.2d 468 (Fla.3d DCA 1978); Perkins v. State, 349 So.2d 776 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). The other evidence of guilt consisted entirely of non-conclusive eyewitn......