Tomengo 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 matters not relevant to the crime charged or the State witness’s direct testimony were nonetheless a proper subject of cross-examination of the witness because the matters showed hostility between the defendant and the witness
• stating that exclusion of a defense witness because of a defense disclosure violation is a severe sanction that should be a last resort reserved for extreme or aggravated circumstances
• stating that exclusion of a defense witness because of a defense disclosure violation is a severe sanction that should be a last resort reserved for extreme or aggravated circumstances
• “The right to a full cross-examination is especially necessary when the witness being cross-examined is the key witness on whose credibility the State’s case relies.”
• “A defendant, as a matter of right, may cross-examine a State witness with respect to his motive, interest, or animus, which is connected to the cause or to the parties to the cause.”
• “The right to a full cross-examination is especially necessary when the witness being cross-examined is the key witness on whose credibility the State’s case relies.” (citing Yolman v. State, 469 So. 2d 842, 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).