Opinion
No. 2D06-4861.
March 12, 2008.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Barbara Fleischer, Judge.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Jeffrey M. Hazen, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Diana K. Bock, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
Affirmed. See Davis v. Washington, 126 S. Ct. 2266, 2277 (2006) (holding that admission of 911 call did not violate defendant's right to confrontation as set forth in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), because "the circumstances of [the caller's] interrogation objectively indicate its primary purpose was to enable police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency"); Barron v. State, 32 Fla. L. Weekly D2002, D2003 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 22, 2007) (holding that two anonymous 911 calls made around the time of shootings were "made to obtain assistance rather than in response to police questioning" and therefore did not violate the Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution or Crawford and were properly admitted as excited utterances or spontaneous statements); Jackson v. State, 931 So. 2d 1062, 1063 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (holding that "911 tape was an excited utterance? and not hearsay" and that it "described events as they were actually happening and was neither testimonial? nor violative of Crawford in any circumstance"); Bartee v. State, 922 So. 2d 1065, 1070 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (holding that admission of 911 calls was proper where they bore the "hallmarks of excited utterances or spontaneous statements" and "were not made in response to police interrogation? and do not seem to fit any of the three categories set out in Crawford").
CANADY and LaROSE, JJ., and GALLEN, THOMAS M., ASSOCIATE SENIOR JUDGE, Concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED.