112 So. 3d 660
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Lassonde charged with third-degree grand theft for $384.82 at Publix; trial followed.
- Three Publix employees testified: two inventory specialists and a part-time customer service clerk.
- The clerk testified about how a re-rung, normal sales receipt is created and identified the cashier; he did not observe scanning or have personal knowledge of Lassonde's cart contents.
- The trial court admitted the receipt as a business record under Florida law, despite Lassonde's objection that the clerk lacked knowledge and qualifications.
- Lassonde testified she did not remember visiting Publix and claimed she did not leave the store with groceries; the jury convicted, but the conviction and sentence were later reversed and remanded for a new trial.
- The court held the clerk was not a qualified witness to authenticate and admit the receipt as a business record, and the manager who created the receipt was not present to testify.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of the receipt as a business record via a noncustodian witness | Lassonde argues clerk lacked knowledge to establish the record's trustworthiness | State contends clerk qualified to testify about the receipt and its creation | Admissibility error; receipt improperly admitted |
| Whether the clerk met the Yisrael predicate for a business-record exception | Lassonde asserts the clerk cannot satisfy the predicate requirements | State asserts predicate requirements were met | Predicate not met; clerk not qualified or aware of receipt's creation |
Key Cases Cited
- Yisrael v. State, 993 So.2d 952 (Fla.2008) (establishes four-part test for business-record admissibility and formats of proof)
- Alexander v. Allstate Ins. Co., 388 So.2d 592 (Fla.5th DCA 1980) (witness must be in charge or familiar with the activity to testify to usual business practice)
- Cooper v. State, 45 So.3d 490 (Fla.4th DCA 2010) (quality of witness depends on training and familiarity with the business records)
- Specialty Linings, Inc. v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 532 So.2d 1121 (Fla.2d DCA 1988) (manager not qualified where not custodian or conductor of the relevant billing activity)
- Nardone v. State, 798 So.2d 870 (Fla.4th DCA 2001) (reiterates limits on admissibility of business records)