observing that a trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence is reviewed for an abuse of discretion, but its interpretation of “the evidence code and applicable case law” is reviewed de novo (quoting Pantoja v. State, 59 So. 3d 1092, 1095 (Fla. 2011))
How later courts described this case
- observing that a trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence is reviewed for an abuse of discretion, but its interpretation of “the evidence code and applicable case law” is reviewed de novo (quoting Pantoja v. State, 59 So. 3d 1092, 1095 (Fla. 2011))
- “Corroborative evidence is admissible ‘to strengthen a witness’ testimony by evidence of matters showing its consistency and reasonableness and tending to indicate that the facts probably were as stated by the witness.’ ” (quoting Chaachou v. Chaachou, 73 So. 2d 830, 837 (Fla. 1954))
- “Generally, a trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.”
- “Once the evidence is admitted, the [factfinder] decides whether it is credible.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CANADY, J.,
concurring in result.
I concur in the majority opinion except for the portions of the opinion relating to the prohibition of the recalling of Ray Allen Brown. I would not address that issue.