Dornau v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that since illegally seized evidence admitted at trial “did not really rebut or contradict anything to which the defendant had previously testified,” it had been improperly admitted
• recognizing that the principles articulated in Walder apply in Florida, and that illegally seized evidence may be used either within the scope of proper cross-examination or in proper rebuttal to contradict the defendant’s direct testimony
• jury relied on evidence showing that shell casing found at the crime scene matched shell casings found at defendant's business
• shell casings found in the open space behind defendant’s business and shell casing found at the murder scene were fired from the same gun, even though the gun was never produced

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).