midpage

Whitfield v. StateWhitfield v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida
Oct 17, 1989
No. 88-1398
Versions:549 So. 2d 1202
14 Fla. L. Weekly 2447
1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5794
1989 WL 120860
PER CURIAM.

In a criminal prosecution, it is improper cross examination to ask a witness if another witness (who had previously testified) “was lying.” Boatwright v. State, 452 So.2d 666 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). We therefore reverse the conviction under review and remand to the trial court for a new trial.1

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Notes

. We also note that in the sentencing, the enhancement because of foreign convictions, was error. Forehand v. State, 537 So.2d 103 (Fla. 1989); Johnson v. State, 525 So.2d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).

Case Details

Case Name: Whitfield v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Oct 17, 1989
Citations: 549 So. 2d 1202; 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2447; 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5794; 1989 WL 120860; No. 88-1398
Docket Number: No. 88-1398
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
Log In