From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hamilton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 14, 1999
734 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Opinion

No. 98-2314

Opinion filed May 14, 1999.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County, Brad Stetson, Judge.

Richard M. Summa, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; Giselle Lylen Rivera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Anthony Hamilton (Hamilton) seeks review of his conviction for sale and delivery of cocaine following a jury trial. He argues, and we agree, that the trial judge committed error by admitting into evidence testimony describing a criminal behavior pattern.

Dean v. State, 690 So.2d 720 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997);Thomas v. State, 673 So.2d 156 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). This evidence was elicited by the state from one of its law enforcement witnesses who testified that in a drug transaction, it was not unusual for one individual to direct a potential buyer to a second individual for consummation of the drug sale.

Because admission of this evidence constituted error and was harmful under the circumstances of this case, we reverse the judgment and sentence and remand for a new trial.

REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.

WOLF, KAHN and LAWRENCE, JJ., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Hamilton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 14, 1999
734 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
Case details for

Hamilton v. State

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY HAMILTON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: May 14, 1999

Citations

734 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Citing Cases

White v. State

— "not uncommon for drug dealers to keep their drugs at a separate location, rather than carrying such…

Lewis v. State

A defendant is entitled to be tried on the evidence in his or her particular case, rather than on…