State v. Kopko
| Decision Date | 26 March 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 77887,77887 |
| Citation | 596 So.2d 669 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Martin David KOPKO, Respondent. 596 So.2d 669, 17 Fla. L. Week. S204 |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Judy Taylor Rush, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for petitioner.
Christopher A. Grillo, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for respondent.
We have for review Kopko v. State, 577 So.2d 956, 963 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), in which the district court certified the following question of great public importance: 1
In a case in which the child victim of a sexual offense testified fully and completely at trial as to the offense perpetrated upon him or her, can it constitute reversible error to admit, pursuant to section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes [1989], prior, consistent out-of-court statements of the child which were cumulative to the child's in-court testimony or merely bolstered it?
We disapproved the district court's opinion in Kopko in Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla.1992). We therefore quash the opinion below on the certified question, and remand for proceedings consistent with our decision in Pardo.
It is so ordered.
1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. M.B.
...Townsend, 635 So.2d 949 (Fla.1994); Hopkins v. State, 632 So.2d 1372 (Fla.1994); State v. Jones, 625 So.2d 821 (Fla.1993); State v. Kopko, 596 So.2d 669 (Fla.1992); Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla.1992); Perez v. State, 536 So.2d 206 (Fla.1988); Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.19......
-
Belcher v. State
...A. THE VICTIM'S PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENTS The Florida supreme court in Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla.1992) and State v. Kopko, 596 So.2d 669 (Fla.1992) held that a child's hearsay statements may be admissible when the statements qualify under the statutory exception of section 90.803......
-
Farrell v. State, 95-1047
...important, the testimony must not inflame the jury so as to taint its verdict. Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla.1992); State v. Kopko, 596 So.2d 669 (Fla.1992). Here, although the evidence may have been relevant to prove Farrell's state of mind, this probative value was outweighed by its ......
-
Matthews v. State
...important, the testimony must not inflame the jury so as to taint its verdict. Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla.1992); State v. Kopko, 596 So.2d 669 (Fla.1992). Here, although the evidence may have been relevant to prove Farrell's state of mind, this probative value was outweighed by its ......