Roman v. State, 3D04-1453.
| Decision Date | 01 September 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 3D04-1453.,3D04-1453. |
| Citation | 937 So.2d 235 |
| Parties | John W. ROMAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Godfrey, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Valentina M. Tejera, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before GREEN, FLETCHER, and RAMIREZ, JJ.
Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for sexual battery and strong arm robbery, claiming error in the admission of hearsay evidence. We reverse.
Defendant was charged and tried for sexual battery with a deadly weapon and strong arm robbery in connection with the assault of the victim K.D., on November 10, 2001. On that day, the victim, a 25-year-old resident of Broward County, came to South Miami to visit her boyfriend. The couple went to several bars and parties where they were drinking. At a Cutler Ridge bar, where they met friends, a dispute arose between the victim and her boyfriend. The boyfriend left. After waiting for a while for one of the friends to take her home, the victim decided to take a bus instead. At a gas station, the victim met a man who said his name was Jose. Jose warned her that she was in a bad neighborhood and told her he would walk her to the bus stop. They then went to an Amoco station where the victim withdrew $20 from an ATM machine. The victim and Jose got on a bus traveling south, although the victim thought she was going north. After ten minutes, Jose told the victim that she had reached her stop. On the pretext of finding a pay phone, Jose lured the victim to the back of a gas station where the assault took place. After her assailant left, the victim made a hysterical call to 911. The victim told the police that the man was wearing a short-sleeve white shirt, but she saw no tattoos on his arms. A videotape from the Amoco station showed the victim with a man fitting the general description given; however, it was not clear enough to determine if the man had tattoos on his arms.
Defendant, who has multiple tattoos on both arms, was arrested four days later. The victim identified defendant as her assailant in both a photo lineup and in court. While testifying about the videotape from the Amoco station, Detective Kraten stated: "I could see her on tape as well as another male who matched the description that she had given me and they were at the counter and obviously conversing . . . and from those tapes and speaking to the store [at this point, defense counsel's hearsay objection was overruled] I was able to obtain the identity of the person who was on the videotape." The detective testified that defendant had worked at the Amoco station where the videotape was made and was located and arrested at a nearby restaurant where he was then working. Defense counsel moved for a mistrial on the grounds that defendant's right to confrontation was violated. He argued that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lidiano v. State, No. 3D05-2898 (Fla. App. 5/9/2007)
...263, 271-73 (Fla. 2000); State v. Baird, 572 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 1990); Collins v. State, 65 So. 2d 61, 66-67 (Fla. 1953); Roman v. State, 937 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Tumblin v. State, 747 So. 2d 442, 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (trial court improperly allowed officer to testify that he arr......
-
Lidiano v. State
...So.2d 263, 271-73 (Fla.2000); State v. Baird, 572 So.2d 904 (Fla.1990); Collins v. State, 65 So.2d 61, 66-67 (Fla.1953); Roman v. State, 937 So.2d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Tumblin v. State, 747 So.2d 442, 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (trial court improperly allowed officer to testify that he arre......
-
Butler v. State, No. 3D19-1172
...State, 674 So. 2d 114, 119 (Fla. 1996) receded from on other grounds, Devoney v. State, 717 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1998) ; Roman v. State, 937 So. 2d 235, 237 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) ; Trotman v. State, 652 So. 2d 506, 507 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). These cases are distinguishable, though, because they each ......
-
Diaz v. State
...matched the physical description provided by the neighbor. As such, it was hearsay. A similar situation was presented in Roman v. State, 937 So.2d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), where the defendant was convicted of sexually battering a victim behind an Amoco station. The detective investigating th......
-
Evidence
...that tends to show that a non-testifying witness had identified the defendant. The testimony is inadmissible hearsay. Roman v. State, 937 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) The court properly refuses to allow the defense to elicit on cross statements made by the defendant during his arrest. When......