Willis v. State, 87-1464
Decision Date | 04 May 1988 |
Docket Number | No. 87-1464,87-1464 |
Citation | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1061,523 So.2d 1283 |
Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1061 Alphonso WILLIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Jeffrey L. Anderson, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Lee Rosenthal, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
We affirm appellant's convictions of burglary and grand theft after a jury trial.
We find no error by the trial court in the way it handled a discovery violation by the state. While we agree with appellant that a discovery violation was demonstrated, we find the inquiry by the trial court concerning the violation to be adequate and no abuse of discretion demonstrated in permitting the previously undisclosed photographs to be admitted into evidence.
We also find no error in the refusal of the trial court to allow appellant's personal participation in a side bar conference between the court and counsel conducted for the purpose of allowing counsel to advise the court of any peremptory challenges of jurors sought to be excluded. During the selection of the jury the following exchange took place between the court and defense counsel:
MS. YOUNG: Alright.
Thank you very much for listening to me. That is all I have.
THE COURT: Thank you, Miss Young.
Speak with your client and when you are finished, come side bar, please.
Yes, ma'am?
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lewis v. State
...with counsel at side bar conferences regarding those challenges is not a basis for reversal under the case law. See Willis v. State, 523 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Smith v. State, 476 So.2d 748 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), aff'd, 500 So.2d 125 (Fla.1986). Lewis also has failed to demonstrate re......
-
Matthews v. State
...the trial bench. See, e.g., Lewis v. State, 566 So.2d 270 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), rev. denied, 581 So.2d 165 (Fla.1991); Willis v. State, 523 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). Early in 1995, the supreme court clarified the scope of rule 3.180(a)(4). In Coney v. State, 653 So.2d 1009, 1013 (Fla.),......
-
Quince v. State
...no limitations on the defendant's ability to consult with counsel before any decisions or challenges were made. See Willis v. State, 523 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); see also Lewis v. State, 566 So.2d 270 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Smith v. State, 476 So.2d 748 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). In this case,......
-
Harris v. State
...Before BARKDULL, LEVY and GERSTEN, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Lewis v. State, 566 So.2d 270 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Willis v. State, 523 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Smith v. State, 476 So.2d 748 (Fla. 3d DCA ...