Kelly v. State
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Hamilton (Fla. 1991)
- Gonzalez v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. The trial judge sent to the jury room a composite drawing of a face which drawing was not in evidence. Whether or not the jury was improperly motivated to convict the Appellant is not for me to say. I cannot know if the Appellant was injured by this error but it is error. Smith v. State, 95 So.2d 525 (Fla. 1957). F.R.Crim.Prac. 3.400(d). State ex rel. Pryor v. Smith, 239 So.2d 85 (Fla. 1 DCA 1970).
I would reverse for a new trial.
Opinion of the Court
Affirmed.
Concurring Opinion
specially concurring:
A composite drawing of appellant was admitted into evidence at the trial. Appellant also offered in evidence a composite drawing of a co-defendant, but it was rejected. Through inadvertence the rejected composite found its way into the jury room together with the other properly admitted exhibits. Without the first suggestion of any prejudice accruing therefrom, appellant seeks reversal of his conviction because the jury was able to consider a composite of a co-defendant which appellant unsuccessfully attempted to have admitted into evidence. Surely it was error to allow the non-admitted exhibit into the jury room, but harmless within the meaning of Section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1977).
Accordingly, I agree that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.