Wolack v. State, 83-1822
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM; ANSTEAD, C.J., DELL, J., and GEIGER, DWIGHT L. |
| Citation | 464 So.2d 587,10 Fla. L. Weekly 309 |
| Parties | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 309 Patricia WOLACK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 83-1822,83-1822 |
| Decision Date | 06 February 1985 |
Page 587
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Fourth District.
Rehearing Denied March 27, 1985.
Page 588
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Tatjana Ostapoff and Gary Caldwell, Asst. Public Defenders, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sarah B. Mayer, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant's conviction and sentence. In doing so we reject appellant's claims of error in the trial court's disallowance of the testimony of a West Virginia police officer as to the reputation for truth and veracity of a state's witness. It appears that the officer's knowledge of the witness's reputation was gained solely through the officer's official position. We do not believe the trial court erred in ruling this to be an insufficient basis upon which to predicate reputation testimony. See Stripling v. State, 349 So.2d 187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). In addition, we believe any potential error to be harmless in view of the fact that another West Virginia police officer, who had known the state's witness prior to becoming a police officer, testified extensively as to his negative opinion of the witness's truth and veracity and acknowledged that other police officers shared this opinion. We also reject appellant's claim of error in the trial court's refusal to give an instruction to the jury that mere presence at the scene of a crime is insufficient to prove guilt. In our view the import of such an instruction was well covered by the trial court's instruction on principals which clearly would not permit a finding of guilt predicated on a mere showing of presence at the scene. We have also considered the issue raised by appellant in her supplemental brief and we hold that the prosecutor's comment in opening statement about the absence of a missing person's report did not constitute an improper comment on the appellant's constitutional right to remain silent. Cf. Nelson v. State, 416 So.2d 899 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).
ANSTEAD, C.J., DELL, J., and GEIGER, DWIGHT L., Associate Judge, concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. State, BH-245
...the proposed instructions add nothing to the standard instructions. Walker v. State, 428 So.2d 321 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Wolack v. State, 464 So.2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA), petition for review denied, 476 So.2d 676 In this case, the jury was presented with two versions of Williams's role in the b......
-
Parker v. State, 4D99-1204.
...to the proposed instruction in this case, we held that the matter was "well covered" by the instruction on principals. Wolack v. State, 464 So.2d 587, 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). The first district has ruled that proposed instructions identical to those in this case were "sufficiently addresse......
-
Dean v. State, 5D02-1528.
...152 (1985); Garcia v. Konckier, 771 So.2d 550 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Young v. State, 598 So.2d 163 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Wolack v. State, 464 So.2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), pet. for rev. denied, 476 So.2d 676 (Fla.1985); Stripling; see also State v. Johnson, 540 So.2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA Although ......
-
Zamora v. State, 90-883
...Before BASKIN, GERSTEN and GODERICH, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Williams v. State, 492 So.2d 1388 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Wolack v. State, 464 So.2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 476 So.2d 676...