From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fuentes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 10, 1999
727 So. 2d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Opinion

No. 97-2640

Opinion filed February 10, 1999. JANUARY TERM, 1999

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Arthur Maginnis, Judge, L.T. No. 96-2354.

John H. Lipinski, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Mark Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, LEVY and SHEVIN, JJ.


We affirm defendant's conviction and sentence finding no error in the trial court's denial of the suppression motion. Bruno v. State, 574 So.2d 76 (Fla.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 834 (1991). In so doing, we hold that Thompson v. State, 705 So.2d 1046 (Fla 4th DCA 1998), is inapplicable. Even if we were persuaded that admission of testimony based on documents that were not in evidence under the business records hearsay exception is error, any such error is harmless in light of the defendant's confession and the overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Fuentes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 10, 1999
727 So. 2d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
Case details for

Fuentes v. State

Case Details

Full title:RUBEN FUENTES, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Feb 10, 1999

Citations

727 So. 2d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Citing Cases

Conner v. State

Thus, even assuming any error occurred in the trial court's exclusion of the victim's statements, such error…