Background

• Gonzales appeals his conviction on aggravated assault with a firearm and resisting an officer, after charges of aggravated battery with great bodily harm and possession of a firearm by a felon were nolle prossed or severed; jury found him guilty on aggravated assault (not discharging a firearm) and resisting, with an eight-year state prison sentence.
• At trial, Montano and Riera testified that Gonzales reached for an unidentified person's gun and fired at Montano.
• Officers Gutierrez and Arocha testified; Gutierrez did not see a gun and no gun was recovered; Arocha testified to conversations with Montano, Riera, and Gonzales.
• The prosecutor questioned Arocha about consistency between Montano’s and Riera’s accounts; defense objected to hearsay and opinion, which the trial court sustained or overruled as indicated.
• During closings, defense argued fabrication by Montano and Riera; the prosecutor argued the stories matched and urged the jury to credit them despite lack of other corroborating physical evidence.
• The trial court admitted Arocha’s lay opinion that the two statements were consistent; the court ultimately affirmed the conviction and sentence on appeal.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Hudson v. State, 992 So.2d 96 (Fla.2008) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
• Acosta v. State, 798 So.2d 809 (Fla.4th DCA 2001) (improper to have one witness opine on another's credibility)
• Seibert v. State, 923 So.2d 460 (Fla.2006) (limits on witness credibility guidance)
• Page v. State, 733 So.2d 1079 (Fla.4th DCA 1999) (police credibility weight concerns)
• Bohm v. State, 826 So.2d 1041 (Fla.5th DCA 2002) (police statements consistent with others not improper bolstering)
• Somerville v. State, 626 So.2d 1070 (Fla.1st DCA 1993) (lay witness opinion admissible when based on perception)