Reyner v. State, No. 98-3742
| Decision Date | 17 November 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 98-3742, No. 98-3993. |
| Citation | 745 So.2d 1071 |
| Parties | Carl Robert REYNER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Paul G. Komarek, Panama City, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Daniel A. David, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
In this consolidated appeal, Carl Robert Reyner challenges his conviction and sentence for an attempted lewd and lascivious act on his minor niece, and the sentencing procedure followed after he violated his community control in another case. Finding no reversible error, we affirm all the issues raised. We write to address Reyner's contention that the trial court erred in ruling that Reyner's statement to a police officer was sufficient corroborative evidence under section 90.803(23)(a)2 b., Florida Statutes (1997), to allow into evidence the child's hearsay statement to her father.
Reyner was charged with making a lewd, lascivious or indecent assault upon his four-year-old niece on October 15, 1997, while the child was being provided babysitting services by his wife, Ruth Reyner, in their home. The child told her father about the incident the night of October 15 before bedtime, the first opportunity they had to be alone together. Upon motion by Reyner, the trial court found the child was not competent to testify at trial. At the same time, the trial court granted the state's motion allowing the child's hearsay statements to her father to be admitted into evidence. At trial, the father testified, among other things, that his daughter told him that, while Reyner and the child were sharing a bed at "nap time," Reyner put her on his chest, placed his penis between her legs, and moved her back and forth, and "wet stuff" came out of his penis. Reyner was subsequently convicted of the lesser included offense of an attempted lewd and lascivious act upon a child.
As this court recently stated in Delacruz v. State, 734 So.2d 1116, 1119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999):
Section 90.803(23) of the Florida Evidence Code addresses the circumstances in which otherwise inadmissible out-of-court statements made by an alleged child victim may be admitted in evidence at trial. To the extent pertinent, that rule permits such statements to be used as substantive evidence at trial provided that the trial court finds that the statements are reliable and either the child testifies at trial or the court finds, further, that "there is other corroborative evidence of the abuse or offense."
In Delacruz, this court addressed the following issue:
[W]hether the statement made by [Delacruz] when he was arrested, admitting that he could have accidentally touched the child's vagina "a lot of times" while playing with her, may constitute "other corroborative evidence" for purposes of section 90.803(23)(a)2b.
Id. at 1122. Delacruz held that such a statement "may qualify as `other corroborative evidence of the abuse or offense' for purposes of section 90.803(23)(a)2b," but because the case was being remanded for a new trial, we expressly left open the question whether the trial court could find "sufficient corroboration in [Delacruz's] statement, alone, to satisfy the requirement of section 90.803(23)(a)2b." Id. at 1122.
The question left unanswered in Delacruz is squarely presented in the instant case. We are asked to decide whether a statement made by Reyner to a police officer after his arrest, by itself, can constitute sufficient corroborative evidence of the act alleged to satisfy section 90.803(23)(a)2 b, so that the out-of-court statement of the child victim could be admitted in evidence at trial. The trial court ruled that Reyner's statement was sufficient corroborative evidence. Our standard of review is whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the evidence. Jones v. State, 728 So.2d 788, 790 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999),citing Perez v. State, 536 So.2d 206 (Fla.1988) and Barton v. State, 704 So.2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Madison v. State
...have reached the decision challenged on appeal.” Clark v. State, 95 So.3d 986, 987 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); see also Reyner v. State, 745 So.2d 1071, 1073 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (“Under [the abuse of discretion] standard of review, we can find an abuse of discretion only if we conclude that no reas......
-
Richardson v. State, 1D02-3590.
...nor the auditor testified. The standard of review for the admissibility of evidence is abuse of discretion. See Reyner v. State, 745 So.2d 1071 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Except in cases of fundamental error, an appellate court will not consider an issue unless it was presented first to the trial......
-
RU v. Department of Children & Families
...the child exhibited signs of sexual abuse were sufficient evidence to corroborate the child's hearsay statement); Reyner v. State, 745 So.2d 1071, 1073 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (allowing defendant's statements to the police to be used to corroborate details in the child's hearsay statements); Jo......
-
Ghelichkhani v. State
...of the abuse or offense" where they supply enough inculpating details concerning the alleged sexual offense. In Reyner v. State, 745 So.2d 1071 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), the defendant was charged with lewd assault upon his four-year-old niece. The incident occurred while Reyner's wife was babysi......
-
"She said what?": what to do in civil domestic violence proceedings with child hearsay.
...Accused --Sometimes statements from the accused will corroborate the allegations of sexual abuse. (35) For example, in Reyner v. State, 745 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), the defendant admitted to taking a nap with the child and sharing a bed with her. The court allowed these statements m......