When Does Deputy Testimony and Prior Conviction Evidence Constitute Inadmissible Hearsay?

A recent Pinellas County Circuit Court case provides an example of when the admission of hearsay or prejudicial evidence at trial can lead to a reversal of the judgment and sentencing. 

Circuit Court Judge R. Timothy Peters decided on August 12, 2009, Singleton v. State of Florida, and evaluated whether the testimony of the arresting deputy and evidence of the defendant's prior felony convictions constituted inadmissible hearsay. 

The defendant in this case was convicted of Obstructing or Resisting Officer Without Violence.  A deputy who was called to the scene to a “burglary in progress.”  The deputy testified that upon intervening with the observed argument or altercation, the defendant began yelling at the deputy and thumped his chest against the deputy’s chest.  The female involved in the altercation testified at trial about the defendant’s prior history of felony convictions.  The issues on appeal were whether the testimony that the deputy was dispatched to a “burglary in progress” and the testimony about the defendant’s prior convictions were permissible evidence. 

Under Fla. Stat. § 90.801, hearsay is defined as an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Judge Peters found that the trial court erred in allowing the deputy’s testimony because it was inadmissible hearsay- it was offered to prove that there actually was a burglary taking place.  He also concluded that the female’s testimony was not hearsay but the danger of unfair prejudice to the defendant outweighed any probative value to the jury. 

To learn more about Rooth Law Group's criminal defense practice, contact St. Petersburg criminal defense lawyers at Rooth Law Group.