Williams v. State, 538 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). · Go Syfert
Williams v. State, 538 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Walker v. State (fladistctapp, 2011-12-07)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited "see" Walker v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Williams v. State, 538 So.2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); cf. Ferguson v. State, 697 So.2d 979 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (holding that cash seized from a defendant's person is not relevant evidence in a case charging simple possession of drugs).
discussed Cited "see" Ezell v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See Williams v. State, 538 So.2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Thomas v. State, 564 So.2d 1263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). [1] "Further, defendant's possession of cash was nonexpert evidence the jury was free to consider, along with the other competent evidence such as the amount, condition, sources, and given reasons for carrying the currency, in common sense resolution of the disputed issue." Lowder v. State, 589 So.2d 933, 936 (Fla. 3d DCA), cause dismissed, 598 So.2d 78 (Fla. 1992) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited "see" D.M. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See In the Interest of B.P., a child, 538 So.2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); In the Interest of C.L.D., a child, 464 So.2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); State of Florida v. A.N.F., a child, 413 So.2d 146 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
discussed Cited "see" DM v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See In the Interest of B.P., a child, 538 So.2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); In the Interest of C.L.D., a child, 464 So.2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); State of Florida v. A.N.F., a child, 413 So.2d 146 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
Anthony Howard WILLIAMS, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
88-1017.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Feb 1, 1989.
538 So. 2d 73
Per Curiam.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Marcy K. Allen, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and John W. Tiedemann, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to sell. The trial court did not err in permitting the state to introduce, as relevant evidence, the cash seized in the arrest. See United States v. Cruz, 797 F.2d 90 (2d Cir.1986); United States v. Dinovo, 523 F.2d 197 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1016, 96 S.Ct. 449, 46 L.Ed.2d 387 (1975); §§ 90.401, 90.402, 90.403, Fla. Stat. (1987). Nor was there an abuse of discretion in finding that the prejudicial effect of admitting the evidence did not outweigh its probative value. Cf. United States v. Spell, 789 F.2d 143 (2d Cir.1986). We also find no error in allowing an officer with specialized knowledge to express his opinion on the relationship between large amounts of cash and drug transactions. Cf. Hosbein v. Silverstein, 358 So.2d 43 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 365 So.2d 714 (Fla. 1978); United States v. Ginsberg, 758 F.2d 823 (2d Cir.1985); United States v. Daniels, 723 F.2d 31 (8th Cir.1983). Therefore, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., concur.

WALDEN, J., dissents without opinion.