Skip to main content

Ruffin v. State

Citations

  • 549 So. 2d 250
  • 1989 WL 111527

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that officers’ identification of the defendant on a videotape of the crime invaded “the province of the jury”
  • holding police officers’ identification of defendant as man in videotape was error where officers did not witness the crime, lacked any special familiarity with defen dant, and were not qualified as experts in identification
  • finding the trial court erred in allowing identification testimony from three officers who simply viewed the videotape and testified it depicted the defendant
  • finding the court erred in allowing three officers to identify defendant as the man in the videotape, where the officers were not eyewitnesses to the crime, did not have familiarity with Ruffin, and were not qualified as experts in identification
  • finding the court erred in allowing three officers to identify defendant as the man in the videotape, where the officers were not eyewitnesses to the crime, did not have familiarity with Ruffin, and were not qualified as experts in identification
  • finding the court erred in allowing three officers to identify defendant as the man in the videotape, where the officers were not eyewitnesses to the crime, did not have familiarity with Ruffin, and were not qualified as experts in identification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cobb

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

5 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.