Bowe v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that caller ID displays and pager readouts are not hearsay because they are not statements generated by a person
• denying motion for rehearing because party “offered the [machine generated] ‘statement’ not to prove the truth of the matter asserted, but to show that the recipient of the [device] was the [other party], since the [device] appeared [at their location]”
• “[N]either the pager nor the caller I.D. screen, like a radar or other similar machine able to give a readout, was a ‘person’ capable of being a ‘declarant’ within the definition of the hearsay rule.” (quoting § 90.801(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2000))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Schuette
  Supreme Court of Kansas· 2002-04-19· cited 26×
• Alan Lyndell Wade v. State of Florida
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2014-12-11· cited 14×
• Andre Holmon v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2019-02-28· cited 9×
• Jean-Philippe v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2013-06-13· cited 6×
• AVILEZ v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2010-12-22· cited 3×
• R.L.G., A JUVENILE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2021-06-16
• Dian Oved v. The Health Spectrum, LLC
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2024-04-10

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Tatum v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 1994-01-25· cited 73×
• United States v. Angela L. Jackson
  Seventh Circuit· 2000-04-03· cited 64×
• Inglett v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1999-07-28· cited 38×