# Nathaniel Brown v. State of Florida

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · March 31, 2026

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11297192

## Case

- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** March 31, 2026
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11297192

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that a ruling on a motion for mistrial is reviewed for an abuse of discretion
- holding that, once a defendant takes the stand and his credibility becomes an issue at trial, the State can expose contradictions and improbabilities in his testimony

## Opinion text

Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida

Opinion filed March 31, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D25-0399
Lower Tribunal No. F22-23158
________________

Nathaniel Brown,
Appellant,

vs.

State of Florida,
Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Andrea R.
Wolfson, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jennifer Thornton, Assistant
Public Defender, for appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Ivy R. Ginsberg, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SCALES, C.J., and EMAS and MILLER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Guzman v. State, 214 So. 3d 625, 632 (Fla. 2017)

(holding that a ruling on a motion for mistrial is reviewed for an abuse of

discretion); Ward v. State, 306 So. 3d 1004, 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“The

trial court should not grant a motion for mistrial merely because an error is

prejudicial. Rather, the lower court should grant a mistrial only when ‘an error

is so prejudicial as to vitiate the entire trial[.]’” (citation omitted) (quoting

Jennings v. State, 124 So. 3d 257, 265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013))); Granados v.

State, 199 So. 3d 384, 389 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (holding that, once a

defendant takes the stand and his credibility becomes an issue at trial, the

State can expose contradictions and improbabilities in his testimony).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11297192. Public record. Not legal advice.