From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Delgado-Santos

Supreme Court of Florida
Dec 22, 1986
497 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 1986)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that a police interrogation is not a “proceeding” within the meaning of the statute

Summary of this case from State v. Sims
See 6 Summaries

Opinion

No. 67419.

October 30, 1986. Rehearing Denied December 22, 1986.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Edward N. Moore, J.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Charles M. Fahlbusch, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for petitioner.

Arthur Carter and John H. Lipinski, Sp. Asst. Public Defenders, Miami, for respondent.

OVERTON, Justice.

This is a petition to review Delgado-Santos v. State, 471 So.2d 74 (Fla.3d DCA 1985), in which the district court reversed the trial court for admitting as substantive evidence a prior inconsistent statement made by respondent's alleged accomplice during a police interrogation. We find conflict with Robinson v. State, 455 So.2d 481 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

The issue requires interpretation of section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), to determine whether this provision of our evidence code permits admission, as substantive evidence at trial, of a trial witness's prior inconsistent statement made during police interrogation. Prior to the evidence code's adoption in 1978, such evidence was inadmissible. See Tomlinson v. Peninsular Naval Stores Co., 61 Fla. 453, 55 So. 548 (1911). The evidence code, under section 90.801(2)(a), now permits such prior inconsistent statements that are "given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition."

In the instant case, the district court thoroughly reviewed this provision's history and its construction and interpretation by other courts. In accordance with the holding of courts in other jurisdictions and the view of commentators addressing the identical provision, the district court determined that a police interrogation was not intended to be an "other proceeding." We approve the district court decision and adopt its opinion as our own. In so doing we disapprove Robinson.

It is so ordered.

McDONALD, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, EHRLICH, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur.

Summaries of

State v. Delgado-Santos

Supreme Court of Florida
Dec 22, 1986
497 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 1986)

holding that a police interrogation is not a “proceeding” within the meaning of the statute

Summary of this case from State v. Sims

In Delgado-Santos and again in State v. Smith, 573 So.2d 306 (Fla. 1990), this Court conducted an extensive analysis of the history and purpose of paragraph (a) of subsection 90.801(2), Florida Statutes.

Summary of this case from Ellis v. State

In Delgado-Santos, we established a bright-line rule that a law enforcement investigative interrogation conducted by the police, even if under oath, is not an "other proceeding" pursuant to section 90.801(2)(a).

Summary of this case from State v. Smith

In Delgado-Santos, we held that this type of law enforcement investigation and inquiry was not an "other proceeding" under the code and, consequently, section 90.801(2)(a) did not apply.

Summary of this case from Dudley v. State

In State v. Delgado-Santos, 497 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 1986), the Florida Supreme Court held that prior inconsistent statements made during a police interrogation by a defendant's alleged accomplice do not constitute statements made in an "other proceeding" under section 90.801(2)(a) and, therefore, such statements are not admissible as non-hearsay, substantive evidence.

Summary of this case from J.J.H. v. State

In Delgado-Santos, the Supreme Court held that a "police interrogation" was not intended to be an "other proceeding" within the meaning of Section 90.801(2)(a), Florida Statutes.

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

State v. Delgado-Santos

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, v. MARIO DELGADO-SANTOS, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Dec 22, 1986

Citations

497 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 1986)

Citing Cases

State v. Smith

The state introduced that evidence not only to impeach but also as substantive evidence given during an…

Smith v. State

See Ivery v. State, 548 So.2d 887, 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). "A witness's prior inconsistent statement to a…

34 Citing Cases