Annotations, Discussions, Cases:
Cases Citing Statute 90.615
Total Results: 28
573 So. 2d 306, 1990 WL 252114
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 1990 | Docket: 132818
Cited 126 times | Published
...to find other errors that deprived him of a fair trial. First we consider a series of claims that involve the testimony of Estes. Smith argues that the trial court erred initially when it granted the state's motion to call Estes as a court witness. Section 90.615 of the Florida Statutes (1985) provides a trial court the discretion to call a court witness when necessary to serve the interests of justice....
505 So. 2d 1314, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 123
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 1987 | Docket: 293020
Cited 44 times | Published
...The court refused to rule on these requests immediately, but part way through Pierson's testimony declared him to be an adverse witness. Wasko now argues that the court erred by not making Pierson a court witness. A court may call as its own a witness whom all parties may cross-examine. § 90.615, Fla....
740 So. 2d 33, 1999 WL 168471
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 1999 | Docket: 1456481
Cited 36 times | Published
...To the contrary, a trial judge may be required to take the initiative in some circumstances, to ensure that justice is done. For example, a trial judge may call a witness or question a witness called by a party, when the interest of justice requires that course of action. See § 90.615, Fla....
579 So. 2d 86, 1991 WL 45123
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 1991 | Docket: 2041247
Cited 32 times | Published
...The trial court found that Shere had been advised of his rights and waived them in accordance with Miranda and Mosley. We find no abuse of discretion. In Shere's final evidentiary claim, he contends that the trial court erred by calling Greulich to testify as a court witness pursuant to section 90.615(1) of the Florida Statutes (1987)....
...private counsel has no merit and warrants no discussion here. We also find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's denial of a motion to exclude a photograph of the victim's body. See, e.g., Jackson v. State, 545 So.2d 260, 265 (Fla. 1989). [9] Section 90.615(1) of the Florida Statutes (1987) provides: 90.615 Calling witnesses by the court....
...er, they determined that generally counsel should not call a witness whom he knew was not testifying truthfully and proceed to impeach that person. C. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 608.2, at 298 (2d ed. 1984). [13] We are concerned here only with subsection 90.615(1) of the Florida Statutes (1987), authorizing courts to call witnesses to testify. We do not comment on subsection 90.615(2) of the Florida Statutes (1987), which authorizes courts to interrogate witnesses....
498 So. 2d 906, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 609
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 26, 1986 | Docket: 1699700
Cited 29 times | Published
...Appellant's convictions are reversed, and the matter remanded for new trial. It is so ordered. ADKINS, OVERTON, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur. McDONALD, C.J., and BOYD, J., dissent. NOTES [1] In 1976, this general rule permitting court witnesses was codified and can now be found in the Florida Evidence Code, section 90.615, Florida Statutes, to wit: 90.615 Calling witnesses by the court (1) The court may call witnesses whom all parties may cross-examine....
461 So. 2d 1380
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1984 | Docket: 464587
Cited 23 times | Published
...State, 437 So.2d 716 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (prior statement not admissible under Section 90.801(2)(a) but admissible under Section 90.608(2)). Under the circumstances of this case, it was impermissible to use the expedient of calling Mincey as a court witness under Section 90.615 for the purpose of eliciting his prior inconsistent statement either for impeachment purposes or as substantive evidence....
723 So. 2d 208, 1998 WL 765134
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 29, 1998 | Docket: 1693632
Cited 14 times | Published
...This rule establishes the procedure to be followed for the use of experts. The District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, has encouraged the use of court-appointed experts to review financial information and reduce the cost of divorce litigation. Tomaino v. Tomaino, 629 So.2d 874 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Additionally, section 90.615(1), Florida Statutes, allows the court to call witnesses whom all parties may cross-examine....
343 So. 2d 659
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 8, 1977 | Docket: 2543484
Cited 9 times | Published
..., the authority of the judge to call witnesses is well established." In resolving the question presented by this case, we look to the new Florida Evidence Code, Sections 90.01, et seq., Florida Statutes, 1976 Supp., to become effective July 1, 1977. Section 90.615 thereof, entitled "Calling witnesses by the court," provides: "(1) The court may call witnesses whom all parties may cross-examine. (2) When required by the interests of justice, the court may interrogate witnesses, whether called by the court or by a party." We recognize that Section 90.615 was neither in effect at the time of the trial in this case, nor during the pendency of this appeal....
545 So. 2d 857, 1989 WL 65508
Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 15, 1989 | Docket: 1345717
Cited 8 times | Published
...rior unsworn statement for the purpose of proving the truth of the prior statement is error. The district Court stated: Under the circumstances of this case, it was impermissible to use the expedient of calling [the witness] as a court witness under Section 90.615 for the purpose of eliciting his prior inconsistent statement either for impeachment purposes or as substantive evidence....
433 So. 2d 1294
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 30, 1983 | Docket: 1727668
Cited 6 times | Published
...Andrews was ultimately charged with several counts of theft and, prior to appellants' trial, he informed the prosecuting attorney that he would not testify for the state unless he was granted total immunity. Therefore, the state attorney moved that the court call Mr. Andrews as its own witness under § 90.615, Florida Statutes, so that the state could impeach him if he testified adversely....
46 So. 3d 124, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 15827
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 20, 2010 | Docket: 60296171
Cited 5 times | Published
witnesses when required by the interests of justice. § 90.615(2), Fla. Stat. (2009). Questioning may be necessary
443 So. 2d 1053
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 10, 1984 | Docket: 1459179
Cited 4 times | Published
...Given the state's inability to vouch for Henderson's credibility, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's action. Armstrong v. State, 399 So.2d 953, 959 (Fla. 1981). Once Henderson became a court witness, he was subject to cross-examination by all parties. Section 90.615(1), Florida Statutes (1981)....
597 So. 2d 352, 1992 WL 74886
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1992 | Docket: 1351279
Cited 4 times | Published
...ty and broad discretion. The Florida Evidence Code authorizes the court to call witnesses, who may be cross-examined by all parties, and to interrogate witnesses called by a party or by the court itself "[w]hen required by the interests of justice." Section 90.615, Fla....
46 So. 3d 124, 2010 WL 4103320
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 20, 2010 | Docket: 2399514
Cited 3 times | Published
...ne possession. The State contends that the trial court did not abuse its discretion because a trial judge may question a witness in the interest of justice. We agree with R.O. A court may question witnesses when required by the interests of justice. § 90.615(2), Fla....
966 So. 2d 492, 2007 WL 3010024
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 2007 | Docket: 2546133
Cited 2 times | Published
...This court may not reweigh the evidence to make value judgments that are appropriate for the trial judge. See Botterbusch v. Botterbusch, 851 So.2d 903, 904-05 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). We also find no error in the trial court's questioning of the former wife. See § 90.615(2), Fla....
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 18, 2020 | Docket: 16986313
Published
wife’s testimony on this matter if necessary. See § 90.615(2), Fla. Stat. (2018) (“When required by the interests
154 So. 3d 1232
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 2015 | Docket: 2629729
Published
...ve his
requested jury instruction and in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal on
the tampering charge. In his remaining argument, Appellant contends that the trial
court erred in calling Johnny Flowers as a “court witness” pursuant to section
90.615(1), Florida Statutes, 1 in light of the 1990 amendment to section 90.608,
Florida Statutes, which allows for any party, including the party calling a witness,
to attack the witness’s credibility....
...1st DCA 2013)
(“To preserve an argument for appeal, an appellant must timely and
contemporaneously object at the trial level, on a stated legal basis, and then raise
that specific contention again on appeal.”).
Accordingly, we AFFIRM.
LEWIS, C.J., WOLF and ROBERTS, JJ., CONCUR.
1
Section 90.615(1) provides that a court “may call witnesses whom all parties may
cross-examine.” The court witness rule was designed for those instances “where a
party cannot vouch for the witness’s credibility, yet the witness’s evidence i...
261 So. 3d 593
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 2, 2019 | Docket: 8468342
Published
witnesses, whether called by the court or by a party.” § 90.615(2), Fla. Stat. “Such questioning may be appropriate
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 18, 2023 | Docket: 66738036
Published
776 So. 2d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (“Section 90.615(2), Florida Statutes, provides that a court
271 So. 3d 1160
District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 2019 | Docket: 14909089
Published
by the interests of justice.’” Id. (quoting section 90.615(2), Fla. Stat. (2017)). “Such questioning
