From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Kopko

Supreme Court of Florida
Mar 26, 1992
596 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1992)

Opinion

No. 77887.

March 26, 1992.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Orange County.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Judy Taylor Rush, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for petitioner.

Christopher A. Grillo, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for respondent.


We have for review Kopko v. State, 577 So.2d 956, 963 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), in which the district court certified the following question of great public importance:

We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.

In a case in which the child victim of a sexual offense testified fully and completely at trial as to the offense perpetrated upon him or her, can it constitute reversible error to admit, pursuant to section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes [1989], prior, consistent out-of-court statements of the child which were cumulative to the child's in-court testimony or merely bolstered it?

We disapproved the district court's opinion in Kopko in Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla. 1992). We therefore quash the opinion below on the certified question, and remand for proceedings consistent with our decision in Pardo.

It is so ordered.

SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Kopko

Supreme Court of Florida
Mar 26, 1992
596 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1992)
Case details for

State v. Kopko

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER, v. MARTIN DAVID KOPKO, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Mar 26, 1992

Citations

596 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1992)

Citing Cases

State v. Plotka

Accordingly, we affirm the trial judge's order of a new trial in this case; and remand this cause to the…

Mattews v. State

§ 90.403, Fla. Stat. More important, the testimony must not inflame the jury so as to taint its verdict.…