Florida Statute 90.610 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title VII
EVIDENCE

Chapter 90
EVIDENCE CODE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 90.610

90.610 Conviction of certain crimes as impeachment.—

(1) A party may attack the credibility of any witness, including an accused, by evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year under the law under which the witness was convicted, or if the crime involved dishonesty or a false statement regardless of the punishment, with the following exceptions:

(a) Evidence of any such conviction is inadmissible in a civil trial if it is so remote in time as to have no bearing on the present character of the witness.

(b) Evidence of juvenile adjudications are inadmissible under this subsection.

(2) The pendency of an appeal or the granting of a pardon relating to such crime does not render evidence of the conviction from which the appeal was taken or for which the pardon was granted inadmissible. Evidence of the pendency of the appeal is admissible.

(3) Nothing in this section affects the admissibility of evidence under s. 90.404 or s. 90.608.

History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; ss. 16, 22, ch. 78-361; ss. 1, 2, ch. 78-379; s. 489, ch. 95-147.

F.S. 90.610 on Google Scholar

F.S. 90.610 on CourtListener

Amendments to 90.610

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 90.610

Total Results: 204

Fotopoulos v. State

608 So. 2d 784, 1992 WL 289664

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 15, 1992 | Docket: 1732432

Cited 111 times | Published

were later admitted without objection. Under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1989), a party may attack

Torres-Arboledo v. State

524 So. 2d 403, 1988 WL 26245

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 1988 | Docket: 2514587

Cited 91 times | Published

statement, as provided under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1985). Section 90.610(1) provides: A party

David Ross Delap, Sr. v. Richard L. Dugger, Secretary, Department of Corrections, State of Florida

890 F.2d 285, 1989 WL 140400

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 20, 1989 | Docket: 822762

Cited 83 times | Published

as a prior criminal conviction under Fla.Stat. § 90.610. See Rolle v. State, 386 So.2d 3 (Fla

State v. JM

824 So. 2d 105, 2002 WL 1448825

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 3, 2002 | Docket: 1435387

Cited 59 times | Published

convictions, cannot be used to impeach witnesses. See § 90.610(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2001) (stating that adjudications

Jacobs v. State

880 So. 2d 548, 2004 WL 1403190

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 24, 2004 | Docket: 1294889

Cited 58 times | Published

defendant's prior convictions, but not the details. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1997); Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida

Mills v. State

462 So. 2d 1075, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 45

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 10, 1985 | Docket: 449501

Cited 42 times | Published

cross-examination concerning his prior convictions. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1981). We find no error in allowing

Dessaure v. State

891 So. 2d 455, 2004 WL 2797213

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 2, 2004 | Docket: 1349807

Cited 37 times | Published

showing that the witness is biased. Additionally, section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2001), provides that

Breedlove v. State

580 So. 2d 605, 1991 WL 77647

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 9, 1991 | Docket: 1365407

Cited 35 times | Published

false statement regardless of the punishment." § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1989). [5] This extends to situations

Huggins v. State

889 So. 2d 743, 2004 WL 2755802

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 2, 2004 | Docket: 1488441

Cited 34 times | Published

as any other witness's credibility. In turn, section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2002), provides in pertinent

Brookings v. State

495 So. 2d 135, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 445

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 1986 | Docket: 1727651

Cited 33 times | Published

did not show the disposition of the charge. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1983) *141 allows a party

Jackson v. State

498 So. 2d 906, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 609

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 26, 1986 | Docket: 1699700

Cited 29 times | Published

impeached by reference to a prior conviction. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1985). The underlying specifics of

State v. Page

449 So. 2d 813

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 1984 | Docket: 1325756

Cited 28 times | Published

importance: WHETHER THE STATE IS PREVENTED BY SECTION 90.610(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (1981), FROM IMPEACHING

Smith v. State

7 So. 3d 473, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 405, 2009 WL 702262

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 19, 2009 | Docket: 1227181

Cited 25 times | Published

false statement regardless of the punishment." § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). A trial judge has wide

Cummings v. State

412 So. 2d 436

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 14, 1982 | Docket: 1525820

Cited 22 times | Published

State, 86 So.2d 773 (Fla. 1956). However, Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes, effective July 1, 1979

Mosley v. State

739 So. 2d 672, 1999 WL 641813

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 25, 1999 | Docket: 1293955

Cited 21 times | Published

criminal convictions is found in Florida Statute section 90.610(1) which provides: A party may attack the credibility

Washington v. State

737 So. 2d 1208, 1999 WL 534733

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 1999 | Docket: 1709666

Cited 21 times | Published

accordance with the provisions of § 90.609 or § 90.610. (4) Showing a defect of capacity, ability, or

Washington v. State

737 So. 2d 1208, 1999 WL 534733

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 1999 | Docket: 1709666

Cited 21 times | Published

accordance with the provisions of § 90.609 or § 90.610. (4) Showing a defect of capacity, ability, or

Lawhorne v. State

500 So. 2d 519, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 24

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1986 | Docket: 1295171

Cited 20 times | Published

disclosure on cross-examination of prior convictions, § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1983), the defense counsel on redirect

Gelabert v. State

407 So. 2d 1007

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 23, 1981 | Docket: 467510

Cited 20 times | Published

90.609 or evidence of a prior conviction by section 90.610. In the instant case, the charges were based

State v. Raydo

713 So. 2d 996, 1998 WL 333429

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 25, 1998 | Docket: 1732753

Cited 19 times | Published

regarding impeachment of a defendant pursuant to section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1995), is preserved for

Jackson v. State

545 So. 2d 260, 1989 WL 61547

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 8, 1989 | Docket: 1345287

Cited 19 times | Published

stolen firearms). Further, and more important, section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1985), directs that a witness's

Jackson v. State

25 So. 3d 518, 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 541, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 1577, 2009 WL 3029662

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 24, 2009 | Docket: 1662100

Cited 17 times | Published

harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Pursuant to section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2007), a party can attack

Riechmann v. State

581 So. 2d 133, 1991 WL 88737

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 30, 1991 | Docket: 1283954

Cited 16 times | Published

impeachment in a Florida court, pursuant to section 90.610(1), provided the accused has not shown evidence

Reeser v. Boats Unlimited, Inc.

432 So. 2d 1346

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 4, 1983 | Docket: 1677429

Cited 16 times | Published

record of his conviction. [Emphasis added.] Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1979), provides: (1) A party

Barber v. State

413 So. 2d 482, 28 A.L.R. 4th 642

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 1982 | Docket: 1702480

Cited 16 times | Published

been codified in the Florida Evidence Code as section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1981), which reads: (1)

In Re Commitment of Cartwright

870 So. 2d 152, 2004 WL 86180

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 21, 2004 | Docket: 1698113

Cited 15 times | Published

basis on which it had chosen to characterize section 90.610(1) as procedural rather than substantive. See

State v. McFadden

772 So. 2d 1209, 2000 WL 1675950

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 9, 2000 | Docket: 1435119

Cited 15 times | Published

"conviction" for purposes of impeachment under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1997), of the Florida

Hall v. Oakley

409 So. 2d 93

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 18, 1982 | Docket: 1525430

Cited 15 times | Published

(Fla. 1961). This position was consonant with § 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1977), as it read at that

Pantoja v. State

59 So. 3d 1092, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 91, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 519, 2011 WL 722374

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 2011 | Docket: 60299563

Cited 14 times | Published

against her uncle should have been admitted under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2002), because there is

Howard v. Risch

959 So. 2d 308, 2007 WL 1373781

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 11, 2007 | Docket: 1525802

Cited 13 times | Published

admissible for the purpose of impeachment. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). At this point, however

Gavins v. State

587 So. 2d 487, 1991 WL 173016

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 1991 | Docket: 1405802

Cited 13 times | Published

dishonesty or false statement, and how many times. § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1989). If the defendant admits the

Jackson v. State

530 So. 2d 269, 1988 WL 91408

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 5, 1988 | Docket: 1678403

Cited 13 times | Published

was proper to impeach his credibility under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1987). Moreover, we cannot

Gosciminski v. State

132 So. 3d 678, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 638, 2013 WL 5313183, 2013 Fla. LEXIS 1988

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 2013 | Docket: 60238539

Cited 12 times | Published

could not be the basis for impeaching Reape. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (2009)(providing for impeachment based

Wilcox v. State

143 So. 3d 359, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 309, 2014 WL 1809636, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 1557

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 8, 2014 | Docket: 60242309

Cited 11 times | Published

record as a form of impeachment. Pursuant to section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2008), the State may attack

Wilcox v. State

143 So. 3d 359, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 309, 2014 WL 1809636, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 1557

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 8, 2014 | Docket: 60242309

Cited 11 times | Published

record as a form of impeachment. Pursuant to section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2008), the State may attack

Britton v. State

604 So. 2d 1288, 1992 WL 220513

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 11, 1992 | Docket: 1686434

Cited 11 times | Published

offense involving dishonesty or false statement. Section 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1989). If the defendant admits

Espinosa v. State

589 So. 2d 887, 1991 WL 253354

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 11, 1991 | Docket: 1441207

Cited 11 times | Published

141(5)(b), (d), (e), (h), Fla. Stat. (1985). [3] Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1987), is inapplicable since

Parks v. Zitnik

453 So. 2d 434

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 29, 1984 | Docket: 1163396

Cited 11 times | Published

with which the appellant had been charged. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1981), provides in part:

Crumbley v. State

876 So. 2d 599, 29 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1359

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 4, 2004 | Docket: 1671122

Cited 10 times | Published

(Fla.2000) ("As this Court has determined, section 90.610(1) involves a matter of court procedure solely

Livingston v. State

678 So. 2d 895, 1996 WL 471155

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 21, 1996 | Docket: 1737015

Cited 10 times | Published

objected that such impeachment was improper under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1995), since adjudication

Botte v. Pomeroy

497 So. 2d 1275, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2363

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 1986 | Docket: 1242857

Cited 10 times | Published

the evidence of prior crimes, we note that section 90.610 of the evidence code specifically forbids the

Livingston v. State

682 So. 2d 591, 1996 WL 604181

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 23, 1996 | Docket: 471906

Cited 9 times | Published

crimes involving dishonesty or a false statement. § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1993). If the defendant answers correctly

Bobb v. State

647 So. 2d 881, 1994 WL 617038

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 9, 1994 | Docket: 437514

Cited 9 times | Published

noted by Charles Erhardt in his comments to section 90.610 of the evidence code, the theory supporting

Anderson v. State

549 So. 2d 807, 1989 WL 118976

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 1989 | Docket: 1373904

Cited 9 times | Published

exception is clothed with many safeguards. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat.; See also, Ehrhardt, Using Convictions

Johnson v. State

449 So. 2d 921

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 25, 1984 | Docket: 1325559

Cited 9 times | Published

within the meaning of the Florida Evidence Code, Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1981). The defendant was

Davis v. State

397 So. 2d 1005

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 5, 1981 | Docket: 1357447

Cited 9 times | Published

that the prosecutor was tracking the language of § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1979), which provides that "[a]

City of Orlando v. Pineiro

66 So. 3d 1064, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12266, 2011 WL 3359613

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 5, 2011 | Docket: 2363235

Cited 8 times | Published

Pineiro argues that no error occurred because section 90.610 permits a party to attack the credibility of

Geralds v. State

111 So. 3d 778, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 503

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 16, 2010 | Docket: 60230888

Cited 8 times | Published

charged with a crime, but never convicted. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2007) (“A party may attack the

Eaglin v. State

19 So. 3d 935, 2009 WL 1544264

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 8, 2009 | Docket: 1651573

Cited 8 times | Published

So.2d 950, 955 (Fla.1999)). Eaglin relies on section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2006), as a basis for his

LaMarr v. Lang

796 So. 2d 1208, 2001 WL 1175340

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 2001 | Docket: 1249945

Cited 8 times | Published

nature of a prior criminal conviction. While section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2000) allows evidence regarding

Ivey v. State

586 So. 2d 1230, 1991 WL 185196

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 18, 1991 | Docket: 1742475

Cited 8 times | Published

misdemeanors and, thus, would be inadmissible pursuant to § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1989). [3] In light of our ruling

Williams v. State

511 So. 2d 1017, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1745

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 17, 1987 | Docket: 1338475

Cited 8 times | Published

impeachment on cross-examination of Williams. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1985) provides in part:

Rosetta McKinzy v. Louie L. Wainwright

719 F.2d 1525, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 15141, 14 Fed. R. Serv. 1023

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 21, 1983 | Docket: 77732

Cited 8 times | Published

Statutes. 4 Relying on Florida Statute § 90.610(l)(b), which prohibits impeaching a juvenile witness

Donton v. State

1 So. 3d 1092, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 80, 2009 WL 36445

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2009 | Docket: 1653439

Cited 7 times | Published

into evidence the collateral-crime evidence. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2005), allows a party

Love v. State

971 So. 2d 280, 2008 WL 80223

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 2008 | Docket: 1731987

Cited 7 times | Published

with a conviction of any crime, pursuant to section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2006). Love claims that

Roebuck v. State

953 So. 2d 40, 2007 WL 934889

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 2007 | Docket: 1315199

Cited 7 times | Published

cases create a false reporting exception to section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2005). At appellant's trial

Llanos v. State

770 So. 2d 725, 2000 WL 1630144

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 1, 2000 | Docket: 1779484

Cited 7 times | Published

this means of impeachment is not afforded by section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1999),[2] the declarant's

Raydo v. State

696 So. 2d 1225, 1997 WL 287577

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 2, 1997 | Docket: 1696245

Cited 7 times | Published

"conviction" for purposes of impeachment under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes? The trial court based

King v. State

431 So. 2d 272

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 12, 1983 | Docket: 456354

Cited 7 times | Published

defendant) has ever been convicted of a felony. Section 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1981); Cummings v. State, 412

Rodriguez v. State

39 So. 3d 275, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 249, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 685, 2010 WL 1791139

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 6, 2010 | Docket: 1387948

Cited 6 times | Published

not have been admissible as impeachment. Under § 90.610, Fla. Stat., only contact which results in a criminal

Peoples v. State

576 So. 2d 783, 1991 WL 22975

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 1991 | Docket: 1669937

Cited 6 times | Published

have a certified copy of the judgment. While section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1987), precludes evidence

Jackson v. State

570 So. 2d 1388, 1990 WL 205448

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1990 | Docket: 1349804

Cited 6 times | Published

prosecutor engaged in improper impeachment under section 90.610, Florida Statutes.[1] On cross-examination

Gamble v. State

492 So. 2d 1132, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1724

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 1986 | Docket: 1518653

Cited 6 times | Published

State, 469 So.2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). [7] § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1983); King v. State, 431 So.2d

Gamble v. State

492 So. 2d 1132, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1724

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 1986 | Docket: 1518653

Cited 6 times | Published

State, 469 So.2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). [7] § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1983); King v. State, 431 So.2d

Carlisle v. State

137 So. 3d 479, 2014 WL 1225200, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 4362

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 2014 | Docket: 60240329

Cited 5 times | Published

the false accusation was inadmissible under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2007), and this court’s

In Re Commitment of DeBolt

19 So. 3d 335, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1929, 2009 WL 530391

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 2009 | Docket: 1651274

Cited 5 times | Published

to character relating to truthfulness. Under section 90.610, a witness's credibility can only be impeached

Henry v. State

948 So. 2d 609, 2006 WL 2883172

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 2007 | Docket: 1773796

Cited 5 times | Published

a felony or a crime involving dishonesty. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1991). If the defendant acknowledges

Ross v. State

913 So. 2d 1184, 2005 WL 2509185

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 12, 2005 | Docket: 1698276

Cited 5 times | Published

impeachment by prior convictions, as codified in section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2003), is that it is restricted

Brown v. State

787 So. 2d 136, 2001 WL 417645

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 25, 2001 | Docket: 1744962

Cited 5 times | Published

which resulted from the improper questioning. Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2000), states that, "[a]

Martin v. State

411 So. 2d 987

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 1982 | Docket: 1327128

Cited 5 times | Published

conviction. The appropriate rule is found in Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1979). It states: (1) A

Desmond T. Kenner v. State

208 So. 3d 271, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 18444

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 2016 | Docket: 4556763

Cited 4 times | Published

through evidence of prior felony convictions. § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2016). “When there has been a

Mathis v. State

135 So. 3d 484, 2014 WL 1133321, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 4219

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 21, 2014 | Docket: 60239654

Cited 4 times | Published

crime involved dishonesty or a false statement.” § 90.610(1). But when a witness is questioned about his

Rogers v. State

964 So. 2d 221, 2007 WL 2428523

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 2007 | Docket: 518658

Cited 4 times | Published

based upon this exchange. Generally, under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2006), impeachment by prior

Pryor v. State

855 So. 2d 134, 2003 WL 21910136

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 2003 | Docket: 1548055

Cited 4 times | Published

of crimes for which he has been convicted. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2001). The witness testifies falsely

Baker v. State

804 So. 2d 564, 2002 WL 63354

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 18, 2002 | Docket: 1699446

Cited 4 times | Published

other than evidence of prior convictions under section 90.610(1), credibility may not be attacked by proof

McFadden v. State

732 So. 2d 412, 1999 WL 213019

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 14, 1999 | Docket: 1513444

Cited 4 times | Published

offense as is required to impeach a witness under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1997).[1] We hold that

Hicks v. State

666 So. 2d 1021, 1996 WL 23484

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 1996 | Docket: 1510894

Cited 4 times | Published

the *1023 consequences of testifying. Under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1993), a witness, including

Parker v. State

563 So. 2d 1130, 1990 WL 95450

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 12, 1990 | Docket: 1281850

Cited 4 times | Published

rule in the Florida Evidence Code, codified as section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1987), which reads: (1)

Simmons v. State

552 So. 2d 268, 1989 WL 135511

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 8, 1989 | Docket: 1663643

Cited 4 times | Published

and the court sustained the objection. Under Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1987), a party may attack

Anderson v. State

546 So. 2d 65, 1989 WL 69812

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 29, 1989 | Docket: 1730874

Cited 4 times | Published

prior event. The appellant argues that under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1987), the credibility of

Roberts v. State

450 So. 2d 1126

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 7, 1984 | Docket: 1433629

Cited 4 times | Published

impeachment was improper in accordance with Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1981), re: conviction

Wright v. State

446 So. 2d 208

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 1984 | Docket: 1780472

Cited 4 times | Published

436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). The clear terms of Section 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1981), so provide: A party

Blasco v. State

419 So. 2d 807

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 28, 1982 | Docket: 1583717

Cited 4 times | Published

excess of one year. However, the second part of Section 90.610(1) presents a more difficult problem. A defendant

United States v. Bobby Jenkins

822 F.3d 1213, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8652, 2016 WL 2754018

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 11, 2016 | Docket: 3063381

Cited 3 times | Published

772 So.2d at 1216. In interpreting section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1997), the statute at

Toney Deron Davis v. State of Florida

136 So. 3d 1169, 2014 WL 1408553

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 2014 | Docket: 56897

Cited 3 times | Published

were relevant to his credibility. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1995). Because Davis testified

Mortimer v. State

100 So. 3d 99, 2012 WL 3711413, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14492

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 29, 2012 | Docket: 60226109

Cited 3 times | Published

(Fla.2000) (“As this Court has determined, section 90.610(1) involves a matter of court procedure solely

Moncus v. State

69 So. 3d 341, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14062, 2011 WL 3903062

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 7, 2011 | Docket: 2359126

Cited 3 times | Published

dishonesty is admissible for impeachment under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1995). *343 Further,

Schofield v. State

67 So. 3d 1066, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10355, 2011 WL 2586346

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 2011 | Docket: 60301923

Cited 3 times | Published

tried and acquitted, is not admissible. Under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2010), the fact of Scott’s

Roosevelt v. State

42 So. 3d 293, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 11282, 2010 WL 3023314

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 4, 2010 | Docket: 1647433

Cited 3 times | Published

to character relating to truthfulness. Under section 90.610, a witness’s ability can only be impeached

Pantoja v. State

990 So. 2d 626, 2008 WL 4073348

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 2008 | Docket: 1293249

Cited 3 times | Published

that person's specific acts of misconduct). Section 90.610 provides for impeachment based on a witness'

Washington v. State

985 So. 2d 51, 2008 WL 2356672

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 2008 | Docket: 1673334

Cited 3 times | Published

support the trial court's decision. See, e.g., § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2006); Jackson, 545 So.2d at 264

Martino v. State

964 So. 2d 906, 2007 WL 2847942

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 3, 2007 | Docket: 1264314

Cited 3 times | Published

convictions and whether any involved dishonesty. § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (2006). We held in Rogers that a very

Reeves v. State

862 So. 2d 60, 2003 WL 22399671

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 22, 2003 | Docket: 1762482

Cited 3 times | Published

other than evidence of prior convictions under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes, credibility may not be

Waggoner v. State

800 So. 2d 684, 2001 WL 1516959

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 30, 2001 | Docket: 1683667

Cited 3 times | Published

defense's failure to disclose them was prejudicial. Section 90.610(1) provides as follows: (1) A party may attack

Rivers v. State

792 So. 2d 564, 2001 WL 788372

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 2001 | Docket: 1416630

Cited 3 times | Published

to permit defense witness to be impeached under § 90.610, Fla. Stat., with juvenile adjudication); Goodman

Martin v. State

710 So. 2d 58, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 749

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 18, 1998 | Docket: 1444868

Cited 3 times | Published

victim's property, and Hall responded that he had. Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1995) provides that convictions

City of Miami v. Ross

695 So. 2d 486, 1997 WL 310040

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 1997 | Docket: 2452595

Cited 3 times | Published

where the convictions occurred many years ago. See § 90.610(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1995). Affirmed. NOTES [1]

Beal v. State

620 So. 2d 1015, 1993 WL 136087

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 3, 1993 | Docket: 1387002

Cited 3 times | Published

"dishonesty" for purposes of impeachment under Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes. [5] Moreover, the admissibility

Lightfoot v. State

591 So. 2d 305, 1991 WL 272779

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 23, 1991 | Docket: 541251

Cited 3 times | Published

special instruction. Under the provisions of section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes, "[a] party may attack

Lawton v. State

538 So. 2d 1369, 1989 WL 16177

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 1989 | Docket: 472496

Cited 3 times | Published

Bishop v. State, 438 So.2d 86 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); § 90.610(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (1987). Finally, the trial court

Wilt v. State

410 So. 2d 924

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 1982 | Docket: 478114

Cited 3 times | Published

v. State, 22 Fla. 600 (1886); Fla.Evid. Code, § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1979). Wilt took the stand to establish

Tilus v. State

121 So. 3d 1145, 2013 WL 5222601, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 14814

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 18, 2013 | Docket: 60234345

Cited 2 times | Published

false statement regardless of the punishment-” § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (2012). “Unless the witness answers

Yudin v. State

117 So. 3d 457, 2013 WL 3724767, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 11299

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 17, 2013 | Docket: 60232681

Cited 2 times | Published

used in considering the credibility of a witness, § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (2010), and based on his prior convictions

Nelson v. State

126 So. 3d 1195, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18065, 2012 WL 4897308

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 2012 | Docket: 60236240

Cited 2 times | Published

his juvenile adjudications should he testify. Section 90.610(1)(b), Florida Statutes, specifically excludes

Tomas v. State

126 So. 3d 1086, 2012 WL 1605294, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 7309

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 2012 | Docket: 60236177

Cited 2 times | Published

purpose of impeachment. “The plain language of section 90.610, Florida Statutes, authorizes impeachment with

Flint v. State

84 So. 3d 469, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 5565, 2012 WL 1193406

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 2012 | Docket: 2582207

Cited 2 times | Published

ask about the nature of those convictions. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2006); Smith v. State, 7 So.3d

ATIS v. State

32 So. 3d 81, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 11751, 2009 WL 2568208

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 21, 2009 | Docket: 1198894

Cited 2 times | Published

of crimes that typically are misdemeanors. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2007), provides: *84

Cullen v. State

920 So. 2d 1155, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 1161, 2006 WL 229792

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 1, 2006 | Docket: 64842420

Cited 2 times | Published

a misdemean- or. Defendant recognizes that section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2004), which allows impeachment

State v. J.M.

824 So. 2d 105, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 621, 2002 Fla. LEXIS 1468

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 3, 2002 | Docket: 64817028

Cited 2 times | Published

convictions, cannot be used to impeach witnesses. See § 90.610(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (2001) (stating that adjudications

Jacobs v. State

800 So. 2d 322, 2001 WL 1410183

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 2001 | Docket: 1283087

Cited 2 times | Published

defendant's prior convictions, but not the details. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1997); Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida

Robertson v. State

780 So. 2d 94, 2000 WL 368468

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 12, 2000 | Docket: 1708736

Cited 2 times | Published

this is not what the state sought to do below. Section 90.610(1), provides: A party may attack the credibility

Myers v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COM'N

705 So. 2d 1000, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 911, 1998 WL 39400

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 4, 1998 | Docket: 1753767

Cited 2 times | Published

used to impeach a witness' credibility at trial. § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1997). As a general rule, any mention

Children's Palace, Inc. v. Johnson

609 So. 2d 755, 1992 WL 358241

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 7, 1992 | Docket: 1473303

Cited 2 times | Published

worthless check convictions are admissible under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1989), and if so, whether

David v. City of Jacksonville

534 So. 2d 784, 1988 WL 122615

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 18, 1988 | Docket: 1707664

Cited 2 times | Published

(1985). Nor is the testimony admissible under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1985), which provides

Goodman v. State

418 So. 2d 308

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 23, 1982 | Docket: 1289143

Cited 2 times | Published

all because they were not actually convictions. § 90.610, Florida Statutes (1979). The merits of that argument

Howard v. State

397 So. 2d 997

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 22, 1981 | Docket: 1706625

Cited 2 times | Published

into evidence. On appeal appellant relies on Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1979) and Fulton v. State

Rivera v. State

274 So. 3d 537

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2019 | Docket: 64718356

Cited 1 times | Published

the witness's prior felony convictions under section 90.610, the jury usually hears only the number of

Gudmestad v. State

209 So. 3d 602, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17987

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 7, 2016 | Docket: 4550697

Cited 1 times | Published

death or imprisonment in excess of 1 year .... ” § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2013); see also 5 Jack B. Weinstein

Joseph Peter Clarke v. United States

184 So. 3d 1107, 41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 41, 2016 Fla. LEXIS 277, 2016 WL 533898

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 2016 | Docket: 3035598

Cited 1 times | Published

772 So.2d at 1216. In interpreting section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1997), the statute at

& SC13-2330 Michael A. Hernandez, Jr. v. State of Florida and Michael A. Hernandez, Jr. v. Julie L. Jones, etc.

180 So. 3d 978, 2015 WL 5445655

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 2015 | Docket: 2816844

Cited 1 times | Published

relating to evidence ■ of certain crimes under section 90.610, Florida Statutes. None of these provisions

Wyon Dale Childers v. Willie L. Floyd, Warden-Glades Correctional Institution

736 F.3d 1331, 2013 WL 6169275, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 23019

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 14, 2013 | Docket: 142762

Cited 1 times | Published

accordance with the provisions of § 90.609 or § 90.610. (4) Showing a defect of capacity, ability, or

Henry v. State

123 So. 3d 1167, 2013 WL 950045, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 3954

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 2013 | Docket: 60234886

Cited 1 times | Published

impeach the victim by a prior conviction under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2010); however, the facts

Baker v. State

102 So. 3d 756, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21778, 2012 WL 6601179

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 19, 2012 | Docket: 60226783

Cited 1 times | Published

deemed so prejudicial as to require reversal”); § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (allowing admission, for impeachment

Hayes v. State

93 So. 3d 427, 2012 WL 2814049, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 11274

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 11, 2012 | Docket: 60310584

Cited 1 times | Published

victims with their prior crimes of dishonesty. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. ("A party may attack the credibility

Freeman v. State

74 So. 3d 123, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14371, 2011 WL 4031529

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 13, 2011 | Docket: 2358375

Cited 1 times | Published

in-court testimony. § 90.806(1), Fla. Stat. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (permitting impeachment by evidence

Stallworth v. State

53 So. 3d 1163, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1443, 2011 WL 362419

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 2011 | Docket: 2406978

Cited 1 times | Published

abuse of discretion standard of review."). Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes, provides: A party may

Rivera v. State

2 So. 3d 1086, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1121, 2009 WL 321625

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 2009 | Docket: 1299391

Cited 1 times | Published

conviction, how many of such prior convictions. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2007); Brown v. State, 787 So

Johnson v. State

923 So. 2d 541, 2006 WL 399528

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 22, 2006 | Docket: 1745153

Cited 1 times | Published

We find this to be reversible error. Under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2001), a party may attack

Holmes v. State

757 So. 2d 620, 2000 WL 628653

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 17, 2000 | Docket: 1698226

Cited 1 times | Published

that can be used to impeach a witness under section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1999). In Page, the Florida

Tampling v. State

610 So. 2d 100, 1992 WL 371399

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 1992 | Docket: 1734707

Cited 1 times | Published

(solicitation of perjury is admissible to impeach under section 90.610(1); standard of review is abuse of discretion)

Porter v. State

593 So. 2d 1158, 1992 WL 25905

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 1992 | Docket: 446425

Cited 1 times | Published

dishonesty or a false statement, and how many times. § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1989); Williams v. State, 511

Benedit v. State

575 So. 2d 236, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 807, 1991 WL 11727

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 1991 | Docket: 64656592

Cited 1 times | Published

a pretrial order in liming, was inadmissible. § 90.610(l)(b), Fla.Stat. (1989); In the Interest of I

Rivers v. State

423 So. 2d 444

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 1, 1982 | Docket: 544625

Cited 1 times | Published

question concerns the impeachment of Rivers under Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1981), on the basis of two

Rivers v. State

423 So. 2d 444

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 1, 1982 | Docket: 544625

Cited 1 times | Published

question concerns the impeachment of Rivers under Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1981), on the basis of two

PARKS v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 15, 2024 | Docket: 68529765

Published

impeached by juvenile adjudications." Section 90.610(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2014), prohibits using

Anthony Mungin v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 8, 2024 | Docket: 67910489

Published

Argued: Oct 24, 2023

pro- bationary status. See Fla. Stat. § 90.610. USCA11 Case: 22-13616 Document: 41-1

MARLON TERRANCE MURPHY v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 5, 2021 | Docket: 59882185

Published

; § 90.404, Fla. Stat.; § 90.402, Fla. Stat.; § 90.610, Fla. Stat. The lower tribunal excluded

Luther McKiver v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 25, 2021 | Docket: 59764818

Published

(Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992) (citing FLA. STAT. § 90.610). “[T]he absence of similar conduct for an extensive

Tina Lasonya Brown v. State of Florida & Tina Lasonya Brown v. Mark S. Inch, etc.

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 27, 2020 | Docket: 17505087

Published

evidence that went unused by trial counsel. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2019). However, we need not “delve

JOSE REYNA v. STATE OF FLORIDA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 26, 2020 | Docket: 17479791

Published

evidence from “years earlier” is consistent with section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2015), which permits

Terry L. Marshall, III v. State of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 13, 2019 | Docket: 16049250

Published

admissible unless he testified in his own defense. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. Even then, only the number of the

Rivera v. State

274 So. 3d 537

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2019 | Docket: 64718357

Published

the witness's prior felony convictions under section 90.610, the jury usually hears only the number of

Mitchell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 2019 | Docket: 14909095

Published

2 aggravated assault, we disagree. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2018), provides: “A party

Gabriel Brian Nock v. State of Florida

256 So. 3d 828

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 1, 2018 | Docket: 8119864

Published

was with the defendant's prior convictions. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2014), provides: "A party

WAYNE DWIGHT FARR v. STATE OF FLORIDA

230 So. 3d 30

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 8, 2017 | Docket: 6219434

Published

appellant’s credibility. See Ross, 913 So.2d at 1186; § 90.610, Fla. Stat. Additionally, the issue in this

Derrick Tyrone Smith v. State of Florida

235 So. 3d 265

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 2017 | Docket: 6164308

Published

could have been used to impeach Walker under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1989),2 the postconviction

Nicholas Alan Nehring v. State of Florida

225 So. 3d 916, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 11396, 2017 WL 3361068

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 7, 2017 | Docket: 6133737

Published

bearing on the present character of the witness. § 90.610(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016). The same rule applies

Thomas R. Lamb v. State

212 So. 3d 1108, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3200

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 10, 2017 | Docket: 4618888

Published

adjudication occurred when the victim was a minor, section 90.610(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2009), makes evidence

Poul Wesley Spradling v. State of Florida

211 So. 3d 1144, 2017 WL 836932, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 2958

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 2017 | Docket: 4613129

Published

six felonies was a crime of dishonesty. Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2016), provides:

Maximo Gordon v. State of Florida

181 So. 3d 1193, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 18027, 2015 WL 7752723

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 2, 2015 | Docket: 3017404

Published

dishonesty or false statement. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2009); Brown v. State,

Williams v. State

175 So. 3d 349, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 13449, 2015 WL 5245221

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 2015 | Docket: 2757113

Published

dishonesty or false statement.” See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (providing that “[a] party may

Kareem Daniel Farrell v. State of Florida

186 So. 3d 1046, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 7069, 2015 WL 2214148

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 13, 2015 | Docket: 2679347

Published

609) or conviction of certain crimes (under section 90.610). Therefore, “evidence of particular acts

Darious Wilcox v. State of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 2014 | Docket: 400988

Published

record as a form of impeachment. Pursuant to section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2008), the State may attack

Hayes v. State

140 So. 3d 1106, 2014 WL 2751049, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 9240

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 18, 2014 | Docket: 60241366

Published

jail clothes that testified to that fact. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat.; *1109Mosley v. State, 91 So.3d 928

State v. Jouzdani

98 So. 3d 1264, 2012 WL 5076096

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 19, 2012 | Docket: 60312168

Published

This subject is addressed in more detail in section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes, (2008), which states

Brock v. Department of Management Services

98 So. 3d 771, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18097, 2012 WL 4897046

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 2012 | Docket: 60312569

Published

(Fla.2000) (“Defining ‘conviction’ [as used in section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1997),] to require the

Mosley v. State

91 So. 3d 928, 2012 WL 2682759, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 11033

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 9, 2012 | Docket: 60310030

Published

Scott v. State, 717 So.2d 908, 911 (Fla.1998). Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2011), provides as follows:

Barcomb v. State

68 So. 3d 412, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14135, 2011 WL 3903118

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 7, 2011 | Docket: 60302276

Published

application of Florida law). Florida Rule of Evidence section 90.610(1) provides that: A party may attack the credibility

Harrison v. State

62 So. 3d 1229, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8456, 2011 WL 2268982

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 10, 2011 | Docket: 2361938

Published

motion in limine, the trial court relied on section 90.610(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2006), which provides

Hayward v. State

59 So. 3d 303, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5566, 2011 WL 1485608

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 20, 2011 | Docket: 2361782

Published

convictions can be admitted as impeachment evidence. Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2008), titled “Conviction

Trapp v. State

57 So. 3d 269, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 4349, 2011 WL 1135168

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 2011 | Docket: 60298990

Published

interpreted section 90.08, the predecessor to section 90.610. Section 90.08 specifically permitted a perjury

Ballard v. McNeil

785 F. Supp. 2d 1299, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31527, 2011 WL 1103888

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 25, 2011 | Docket: 2015035

Published

prior felony convictions. Florida Statutes section 90.610 provides that a party may attack the credibility

Washington v. State

985 So. 2d 51, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 8429

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 2008 | Docket: 64855138

Published

support the trial court’s decision. See, e.g., § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2006); Jackson, 545 So.2d at 264

Cooper v. McNeil

622 F. Supp. 2d 1242, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33443, 2008 WL 1848783

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 2008 | Docket: 2288083

Published

See Response at 26-28. Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 90.610(1), a party may attack the credibility of a witness

FedEx Ground Package System v. Futch

944 So. 2d 469, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 19940, 2006 WL 3422373

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 29, 2006 | Docket: 1155895

Published

false statement for impeachment purposes under section 90.610 of the Florida Statutes. This is an issue of

Ray v. State

933 So. 2d 716, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 12402, 2006 WL 2057278

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 26, 2006 | Docket: 64845749

Published

to attack the credibility of the witness. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (2004). During cross-examination

Bowers v. State

929 So. 2d 1199, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 9109, 2006 WL 1569915

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 2006 | Docket: 64844826

Published

criminal record became subject to disclosure. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (2000). However, absent trial counsel’s

Ahariache v. State

882 So. 2d 523, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 13877, 2004 WL 2101896

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 22, 2004 | Docket: 64832583

Published

defendant had previous, felony convictions, see § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (2003) — “into whether the felon[ies]

Nova v. State

874 So. 2d 1263, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8310, 2004 WL 1283778

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 2004 | Docket: 64831032

Published

the clerk’s prior convictions is governed by section 90.610, Florida Statutes (2003), which permits impeachment

Burst v. State

836 So. 2d 1107, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 1363, 2003 WL 289262

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 2003 | Docket: 64820647

Published

“of a crime” was broader than allowed under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (2000), which only permits

Trowell v. J.C. Penney Co.

813 So. 2d 1042, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 4967, 2002 WL 561693

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 17, 2002 | Docket: 64814348

Published

place more than ten years prior to the trial. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (2000). The record on appeal reflects

State v. Wright

803 So. 2d 793, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 17135, 2001 WL 1539154

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 5, 2001 | Docket: 64811394

Published

whom are subject to impeachment pursuant to section 90.610, Florida Statutes, or to disclose pending criminal

Roper v. State

763 So. 2d 487, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8764, 2000 WL 959759

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 12, 2000 | Docket: 64799022

Published

reference to a prior conviction of certain crimes. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1997). The question asked by the

Jones v. State

765 So. 2d 767, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8026, 2000 WL 826954

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2000 | Docket: 64799861

Published

court’s discretion in limiting his examination. See § 90.610(1), Fla. Stat. (1997). In like vein, he maintains

Breedlove v. Moore

74 F. Supp. 2d 1226, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17808, 1999 WL 1049619

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 8, 1999 | Docket: 2296831

Published

as a prior criminal conviction under Fla.Stat. § 90.610. See Rolle v. State, 386 So.2d 3 (1980) (general

Lawton v. State

743 So. 2d 51, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 11131, 1999 WL 628974

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 1999 | Docket: 64791644

Published

of Lawton and the victim. He contends that section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes allows a witness’ credibility

Washington v. State

737 So. 2d 1208, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10059

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 1999 | Docket: 64789652

Published

accordance with the provisions of § 90.609 or § 90.610. (4) Showing a defect of capacity, ability, or

Hamilton v. State

722 So. 2d 266, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 15955, 1998 WL 879469

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 1998 | Docket: 64784919

Published

impeachment is expressly precluded in Florida by section 90.610(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1997): Conviction

Goodwin v. State

734 So. 2d 1057, 1998 WL 821771

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 1998 | Docket: 1731102

Published

witness by questioning him about prior arrests. Section 90.610, Florida Statutes, provides for attack on the

Dopson v. State

719 So. 2d 37, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 11820, 1998 WL 636792

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 18, 1998 | Docket: 64783492

Published

be used to impeach the defendant pursuant to section 90.610. Raydo v. State, 696 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 1st DCA

Brakeall v. State

696 So. 2d 1246, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 6937, 1997 WL 336586

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 20, 1997 | Docket: 64775039

Published

involving dishonesty or a false statement. See § 90.610, Fla. Stat. (1995). We need not reach the question

Wilson v. City of Fort Pierce

673 So. 2d 123, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4667, 1996 WL 228618

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 8, 1996 | Docket: 64764504

Published

Torres-Arboledo v. State, 524 So.2d 403 (Fla.1988). § 90.610, Fla.Stat. (1993). Further, the trial court failed

Harris v. State

660 So. 2d 378, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 9695, 1995 WL 544141

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 15, 1995 | Docket: 64758661

Published

1994), the court explained the evolution of section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1993) which permits a

Williams v. State

654 So. 2d 261, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4499, 1995 WL 245949

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 1995 | Docket: 64755891

Published

absolute requirement for such a formality. Section 90.610(1),. Florida Stat*262utes (1993), governs impeachment

Johnson v. Singletary

883 F. Supp. 1535, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5837, 1995 WL 254338

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 1995 | Docket: 1707828

Published

criminal history on direct examination. Fla.Stat. § 90.610(1) ("A party may attack the credibility of any

Peterson v. State

645 So. 2d 10, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 8854, 19 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1921

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 1994 | Docket: 64752136

Published

the newly enacted evidence code, specifically section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1979). Under the new

Brown v. State

610 So. 2d 579, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12520, 1992 WL 362196

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 1992 | Docket: 64692818

Published

credibility, as it would be as to any other witness. § 90.610, Fla.Stat. (1989). The state argues unconvincingly

Laffman ex rel. Jacques v. Sherrod

565 So. 2d 760, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5185, 1990 WL 98598

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 17, 1990 | Docket: 64652392

Published

DCA 1986), rev. denied, 508 So.2d 15 (Fla.1987); § 90.610, Fla.Stat. (1989). We believe that the series

Meyers v. State

561 So. 2d 1304, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3798, 1990 WL 70511

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 1990 | Docket: 64650833

Published

about the details of his prior convictions. See § 90.610, Fla.Stat. (1989); Jackson v. State, 498 So.2d

Quinones v. State

528 So. 2d 46, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1523, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2889, 1988 WL 65190

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 1988 | Docket: 64635872

Published

The majority opinion gains no support from section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1985), which provides:

Sloan v. State

500 So. 2d 727, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 217, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6261

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 1987 | Docket: 64624283

Published

record was needed as substantive proof of a crime. § 90.610, Fla.Stat. (1985). Thus the decision not to sever

Castillo v. State

490 So. 2d 1066, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1494, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8728

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 8, 1986 | Docket: 64620368

Published

Castillo if he had any prior felony convictions. See § 90.610, Fla.Stat. (1983). Castillo responded affirmatively

Lawhorne v. State

481 So. 2d 19, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2672, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17135

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 3, 1985 | Docket: 64616553

Published

disclosure on cross-examination of prior convictions, § 90.610, Fla.Stat. (1983), the defense counsel on redirect

Belton v. State

475 So. 2d 275, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2101, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15752

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 1985 | Docket: 64614079

Published

act and, therefore, falls within the scope of section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1988). See State v. Page

Walker v. State

474 So. 2d 916, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2062, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15691

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 1985 | Docket: 64613816

Published

State, 412 So.2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1983). As to the direction

Hamilton v. State

447 So. 2d 1008, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12489

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 1984 | Docket: 64603860

Published

witness’ credibility may be impeached under section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1981).1 We hold that

Reeser v. Boats Unlimited, Inc.

432 So. 2d 1346, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20057

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 4, 1983 | Docket: 64597565

Published

record of his conviction. [Emphasis added.] Section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1979), provides: (1) A party

Payne v. State

426 So. 2d 1296, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18703

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 23, 1983 | Docket: 64595190

Published

out that the prior conviction was on appeal. Section 90.610(2), Florida Statutes (1981), which provides

Page v. State

436 So. 2d 153, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 27768

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 16, 1983 | Docket: 64598971

Published

Constitution (1972): WHETHER THE STATE IS PREVENTED BY SECTION 90.610(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (1981), FROM IMPEACHING

Plasencia v. State

426 So. 2d 1051, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18540

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 1983 | Docket: 64595099

Published

90.608(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1981), nor section 90.610, Florida Statutes (1981), are implicated.

McClellan v. State

417 So. 2d 1098, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21209

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 1982 | Docket: 64591638

Published

be followed in' impeaching a witness under Section 90.610(1), Florida Statutes (1981). However, he did

Dunlap v. State

404 So. 2d 853, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21407

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 14, 1981 | Docket: 64585528

Published

*855such would not be admissible at trial under section 90.610(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1979). Finally, it

Johnson v. State

382 So. 2d 693, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4196

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 3, 1980 | Docket: 64575615

Published

crime involved dishonesty or a false statement.” § 90.610(1), Fla.Stat. (1979). Obviously, this event is

Ward v. State

343 So. 2d 77, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15171

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 1977 | Docket: 64557458

Published

76-237, effective July 1, 1977, provides in Section 90.610: (1) A party may attack the credibility of