Skip to main content

Edmond v. State

Citations

  • 559 So. 2d 85
  • 1990 WL 11787

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that a witness’s emotional description of an assailant made two to three hours after witnessing the crime qualified as an excited utterance
  • finding excited utterance exception applied to statements made two to three hours after crime was committed, where witness was still frightened and emotional
  • admitting a statement made two or three hours after the offense
  • upholding the admissibility of “an emotional description of the assailant” given by a “frightened” eleven-year-old boy two to three hours after the incident where “the child was excited, perhaps even hysterical, at the time his statements were made”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Barkdull, Nesbitt and Ferguson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

4 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.