Wall v. State

Mar 17, 1993
No. 91-1658
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Farmer
PER CURIAM.

The State concedes that Appellant s right to confront witnesses was violated by the introduction of a deposition to perpetuate testimony at which Appellant was not present. Brown v. State, 471 So.2d 6 (Fla.1985). Its use constitutes fundamental error. Regarding the other issue raised, we find no error in the denial of Appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal.

We reverse and remand for a new trial.

STONE and FARMER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Senior Judge, concur.