Roberts v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT TERRY ROBERTS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) ________________________________ ) Opinion filed November 1, 2002. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; J Michael McCarthy, Judge. James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Robert D. Rosen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Susan M. Shanahan, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. WHATLEY and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur. BLUE, C.J., Concurs with opinion. CASE NO. 2D01-3504 BLUE, Chief Judge, Concurring. I concur in the affirmance; however, I am compelled to point out that the trial court erroneously allowed the officer to testify that there was an outstanding warrant for Mr. Roberts. Such testimony was inadmissible evidence of collateral crimes. See § 90.404(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000). The evidence of the warrant was not relevant to prove any material fact in issue in this case. Therefore, its only relevance was to show bad character and the propensity to commit a crime on the part of Mr. Roberts. However, based on all the facts of this case, I conclude the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986). -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.