From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lecoin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 15, 1982
418 So. 2d 336 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. 81-1605.

August 3, 1982. Rehearing Denied September 15, 1982.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Mario P. Goderich, J.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Lee Weissenborn, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Paul Mendelson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.


We affirm the defendant's convictions upon a holding that (1) the out-of-court identification procedure was not unnecessarily suggestive and did not give rise to any substantial likelihood of mistaken identification, Grant v. State, 390 So.2d 341 (Fla. 1980); Gaines v. State, 406 So.2d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); (2) the in-court identification of the defendant was, independent of the pretrial show-up, admissible where the eyewitness-victim, with a clear and unobstructed view, observed Lecoin for more than twelve minutes in a well-lit store, Hanks v. State, 305 So.2d 817 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); and (3) in any event, the defendant, by not objecting to the admission of the identification testimony at trial, has failed to preserve this point for our review, Jones v. State, 360 So.2d 1293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Stanley v. State, 357 So.2d 1031 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Lecoin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 15, 1982
418 So. 2d 336 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Lecoin v. State

Case Details

Full title:FRANTZ LECOIN, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Sep 15, 1982

Citations

418 So. 2d 336 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

Taylor v. State

We hold that under the totality of the circumstances the identification was reliable, and there was no…

State v. Mitchell

We find that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law when it excluded from evidence…