Skip to main content

Bartholomew v. State

Citations

  • 101 So. 3d 888
  • 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18969
  • 2012 WL 5348436

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • finding impeachment with prior inconsistent statement was improper where State called witness despite fact that witness had repudiated his prior statement before trial and had been uncooperative during proffer
  • “When determining prejudice, appellate courts may look at whether the State compounded the error by relying on the evidence in final argument.”
  • “When determining prejudice, appellate courts may look whether the State compounded the error by relying on the evidence in final argument. This applies regardless of whether there is a separate objection to the use of the evidence in final argument.”
  • ‘When determining prejudice, appellate courts may look whether the State compounded the error by relying on the evidence in final argument. This applies regardless of whether there is a separate objection to the use of the evidence in final argument.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Damoorgian, Polen, Warner

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.