State v. Wright
2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 15714
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Wright charged with armed kidnapping with intent to harm or terrify in April 2009; victim obtained domestic violence injunction on March 24, 2009 and Wright was alleged to have been in a relationship with her.
- Wright allegedly entered the home in violation of the injunction, held the victim against her will, armed himself with a knife, threatened self-harm and the victim, and prevented her from calling for help.
- The State gave notices of intent to use other-crimes evidence; only the prior domestic violence acts against the victim are at issue; Wright objected and a hearing was held.
- On November 8, 2010, the trial court denied admission of the other-crimes evidence, ruling the victim’s testimony related solely to bad character/proclivity under section 90.404(2).
- The Second District granted certiorari, held the trial court departed from essential requirements by applying 90.404(2)(a) to bar the victim’s testimony, and quashed the order; the evidence was probative of motive/intent and its probative value outweighed prejudicial risk.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior acts under 90.404(2)(a) versus general relevancy under 90.402 | Wright’s prior domestic violence acts are relevant to motive/intent | Evidence is barred as probative of bad character and prejudicial | Trial court erred; evidence admissible for motive/intent where probative value outweighs prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Pettis, 520 So.2d 250 (Fla.1988) (certiorari review of evidentiary orders; irreparable harm doctrine)
- State v. Smith, 586 So.2d 1237 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (certiorari review of evidentiary rulings; adherence to essential requirements of law)
- Gillespie v. State, 227 So.2d 550 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969) (departure from essential requirements of law standard for certiorari)
- Sexton v. State, 697 So.2d 833 (Fla.1997) (explanation of relevancy and balancing probative value vs prejudice under 90.402/90.403)
- Bryan v. State, 533 So.2d 744 (Fla.1988) (similar-fact crimes framework within 90.404(2)(a))
- Dennis v. State, 817 So.2d 741 (Fla.2002) (admission of collateral acts to show motive when relationship with victim relevant)
- State v. Gad, 27 So.3d 768 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (acknowledges prejudice but upholds admissibility where probative)
- Williams v. State, 621 So.2d 413 (Fla.1993) (Williams rule; admissibility of evidence of other crimes)