Skip to main content

Cofield v. State

Citations

  • 474 So. 2d 849
  • 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1926

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that testimony of value was legally insufficient because it was based off of computer printouts which constituted inadmissible hearsay without a proper foundation established
  • concluding that the court's erroneous admission of hearsay was harmful given that \no other competent evidence\ established the value of the stolen goods
  • adopting rule as stated in Pickrell v. State, 301 So.2d 473, 474 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974) [1]
  • adopting rule as stated in Pickrell v. State, 301 So.2d 473, 474 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
  • deeming the testimony of a company security officer, who lacked personal knowledge of the value of the stolen goods, insufficient to establish value
  • reversing conviction for grand theft finding improperly admitted evidence of value was harmful error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ervin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.