McNeil 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 “although the statement was properly admitted for impeachment purposes, it was not substantive evidence of appellants’ guilt”
• reversing conviction based in large part on impeachment evidence improperly considered as substantive evidence
• testimony of witness exculpating defendant was prejudicial to state and witness was therefore adverse — thus, prior unsworn statement was properly admitted for impeachment purposes under Section 90.608 but inadmissible as substantive evidence under Section 90.801(2)(a)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Brooks v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 2005-06-23· cited 107×
• Austin v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-12-17· cited 30×
• Jackson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-06-09· cited 18×
• Rockerman v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2000-12-06· cited 9×
• Bertone v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-04-21· cited 8×
• Interest of M.M. v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-02-14· cited 6×
• Williams v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-01-10· cited 5×
• Clements v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-08-10· cited 4×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• R. A. L. v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1981-09-01· cited 35×
• Webb v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1983-01-19· cited 14×
• Pitts v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1976-05-24· cited 13×
• Kimbler v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1978-07-26· cited 6×