From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gonzalez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Nov 28, 2007
971 So. 2d 891 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

Summary

affirming trial court's discretionary decision to determine witness was unavailable “due to her advanced age and illness”

Summary of this case from Richardson v. State

Opinion

No. 3D06-875.

November 28, 2007.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Peter Adrien, Judge.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General and Maria T. Armas, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before GERSTEN, C.J., and GREEN, J., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.


On the record before us, we cannot conclude that the trial court erred in its determination that the State's witness was unavailable to testify in person at trial, as defined in Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(j)(6), due to her advanced age and illness. Thus, the court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted this witness's perpetuated deposition testimony. See DiBattisto v. State, 480 So.2d 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). Accordingly, we affirm the appellant's conviction and sentence for first-degree murder with a firearm.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Gonzalez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Nov 28, 2007
971 So. 2d 891 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

affirming trial court's discretionary decision to determine witness was unavailable “due to her advanced age and illness”

Summary of this case from Richardson v. State
Case details for

Gonzalez v. State

Case Details

Full title:Juan M. GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Nov 28, 2007

Citations

971 So. 2d 891 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

Citing Cases

Richardson v. State

Even without additional evidentiary details about the doctor's visit that the prosecutor referenced, the…

Knox v. State

See Hurst v. State, 18 So.3d 975, 1007 (Fla.2009) (“[T]he decision whether to grant a motion to perpetuate…