Willis v. State
Decision Date | 18 December 1968 |
Docket Number | No. 37375,37375 |
Citation | 217 So.2d 106 |
Parties | Joe WILLIS, Petitioner, v. STATE ofFlorida, Respondent. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
T. Edward Austin, Jr., Public Defender, and Ralph W. Nimmons, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, for petitioner.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Raymond L. Marky, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Petitioner was charged, tried and found guilty by a jury of the offense of robbery. The judgment of conviction was affirmed by the First District Court of Appeal. Willis v. State, 208 So.2d 458 (1 DCA Fla.1968).
On appeal to the District Court petitioner challenged the correctness of the trial court's ruling which admitted into evidence over petitioner's objection testimony of a police officer who witnessed an extrajudicial identification of petitioner by the victim of the robbery the day after the offense occurred. The District Court in affirming the trial court stated in part as follows:
We issued a writ of certiorari because of apparent conflict between the decision of the District Court of Appeal with the opinion of this Court in Martin v. State, 100 Fla. 16, 129 So. 112 (1930):
'In other words, testimony by officers or third persons that the victims identified the defendant, or a photograph as that of defendant, at some time prior to the trial, and not in a court, is not generally admissible, as being hearsay and extrajudicial identification * * *.'
We conclude that the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Freber
...the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, reported at 352 So.2d 106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). That decision conflicts with Willis v. State, 217 So.2d 106 (Fla.1968), and Williams v. State, 350 So.2d 842 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). We have jurisdiction. The issue is whether evidence of a prior out-......
-
Taylor v. State
...merit. Dorsey v. State, 9 Md.App. 80, 262 A.2d 591 (1970); State v. Lancaster, 25 Ohio St.2d 83, 267 N.E.2d 291 (1971); Willis v. State, Fla.Supr., 217 So.2d 106 (1968). D. The defendant contends that evidence of the pre-trial identification was not admissible in The order of proof lies wit......
-
Downer v. State
...reiterated, essentially, this characterization when again shown the photograph. Citing the decision of this Court in Willis v. State, 217 So.2d 106 (Fla.1968), appellant Cohen contends that these extrajudicial identifications of her photograph should not have been considered by the jury as ......
-
Bryan v. State
...the need for police procedures insuring reliability. Following this sound opinion, the Supreme Court adopted Judge Wigginton's view. Willis v. State, Fla.1968, 217 So.2d 106. A variety of problems can arise as a result of traditional hearsay analysis of evidence of prior identification. Sup......