TERRY SHELDON SALADEEN vs STATE OF FLORIDA

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT UNTIL TIME NOT FINAL EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED TERRY SHELDON SALADEEN, Appellant, Case No. 5D20-584 v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _______________________________/ Opinion filed March 9, 2021 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County, Matthew M. Foxman, Judge. Paula C. Coffman, of Law Office of Paula Coffman, Orlando, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kaylee D. Tatman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Small v. State, 179 So. 3d 421, 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (“The standard of review applied to a trial court’s finding that the hearsay statements of a child victim are reliable and come from a trustworthy source, making them admissible pursuant to section 90.803(23), [Florida Statutes,] is abuse of discretion.” (citing Perez v. State, 536 So. 2d 206, 210 (Fla. 1988); Jones v. State, 728 So. 2d 788, 790 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999))); Rutledge v. State, 1 So. 3d 1122, 1131 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“The similarity of the prior acts to the charged crimes . . . , the closeness in time . . . , and the frequency of the prior acts lead ineluctably to the conclusion that the probative value of the . . . previous child molestation of the same victim of the charged crimes substantially outweighs the danger of unfair prejudice.” (citing McLean v. State, 934 So. 2d 1248, 1262 (Fla. 2006))); see also Smith v. State, 538 So. 2d 66, 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (“Evidence [under section 90.404(2), Florida Statutes,] that deals only with similar sex acts against the [minor] victim in the case being tried is far less subject to objection than evidence of similar acts against other victims.” (citing Gibbs v. State, 394 So. 2d 231, 232 (Fla. 1st DCA), aff’d, 406 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 1981))). LAMBERT, TRAVER and NARDELLA, JJ., concur. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.