Johnson v. State, Z--352
| Decision Date | 13 October 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. Z--352,Z--352 |
| Citation | 338 So.2d 252 |
| Parties | Gary JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender and Michael J. Minerva, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and A. S. Johnston, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant was convicted on one count of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony and on a second count of larceny of a firearm. The trial judge pronounced one sentence on the two counts. This appeal is from the judgments and sentence.
Appellant contends that the court erred in refusing to permit him to proffer certain testimony of his mother, witness Josephine Johnson. Willie Davis, an alleged accomplice, testified against appellant at the trial. In attempting to show bias of Davis against him, appellant's attorney, on cross-examination of Davis, asked 'Did Josephine Johnson ever accuse you of stealing her silverware out of her home in Clearwater? An objection was made. In support of the question, appellant's counsel stated: 'Your Honor, may I state to the court at this time that I think the question goes to the potential interest or bias of the witness in testifying against the defendant Johnson here today and that's why I pose the question.' The court sustained the objection. Later, Josephine Johnson (mother of appellant and also the sister of witness Willie Davis) was put on the stand by appellant in a further attempt to show bias of Davis against appellant. She was asked by appellant's attorney whether Davis had ever stayed with her in Clearwater. She replied that he had and then she was asked the following question: 'How did you and Willie Davis get along down there?' Objection was made, the court sustained the objection, and appellant's counsel asked if he could make a proffer of her testimony out of the presence of the jury. The court declined to allow the proffer. Appellant's counsel stated to the court that the question was a preliminary one leading into some difficulties that Mrs. Johnson had with Willie Davis while he was in Clearwater which he stated went to explain the interest and bias of Davis in accusing appellant of the crime. While the question posed to witness Davis was proper cross-examination in an attempt to show bias or animus (see Wallace v. State, 41 Fla. 547, 26 So. 713 (1899); Kirkland v. State, 185 So.2d 5 (Fla. 2 DCA 1966)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dorfman v. State
...... 8 The First District Court of Appeal has now adopted the Second District's position. Johnson v. State, 338 So.2d 252 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). 9. The Third District Court of Appeal, which had also accepted Darden, 10 has now . ......
-
MacCormick v. MacCormick
...jurisdictions have held that it was not reversible error for the trial court to disallow an offer of proof. See Johnson v. State, 338 So.2d 252, 253 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1976) (error in refusing to allow offer of proof harmless where proposed evidence was only remotely relevant and was testifie......
-
Hannah v. State, 82-1353
...evidence tends to establish that the witness is appearing for any reason other than to tell the truth. D.C. v. State; Johnson v. State, 338 So.2d 252 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). 1 The sixth amendment right to confrontation of witnesses requires that a defendant in a state criminal case be allowed ......
-
Brown v. State, AK-264
...1st DCA 1975). This court has also held, however, that the error in failing to permit a proffer can be harmless, see Johnson v. State, 338 So.2d 252 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), in which, "[f]rom the statements made on the record by appellant's counsel, it appears that he desired to show that becau......