District Court of Appeal of Florida March 17, 2006, No. 5D05-1741 (Reed v. State)
Also known as
United States · · · 17-03-2006
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Chandler v. State, 702 So.2d 186, 197-198 (Fla.1997) (recognizing prior consistent statements are considered non-hearsay if the following conditions are met: the person who made the prior consistent statement testifies at trial and is subject to cross-examination concerning that statement; and the statement is offered to rebut an express or implied charge of improper
Read the full text
This document is published by courtlistener.com.
Moonlit adds the citation network, article-level links and cross-references, which are available to search for free.
Sign in to Moonlit