LAW.coLAW.co

CORDOVI v. STATE (2024)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.2024-04-03No. No. 3D22-1393

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

Affirmed. See Thach v. State, 342 So. 3d 620, 625 (Fla. 2022) (affirming denial of motion for continuance after mid-trial amendment to information “using the prejudice standard and engaging in a fact-specific individualized inquiry”); Lopez v. State, 888 So. 2d 693, 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), affd, 974 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 2008) (“Many courts have concluded that a hearsay statement made in a 911 call is not testimonial, because the statement is not made in response to police questioning, and because the purpose of the call is to obtain assistance, not to make a record against someone.”); Thompson v. State, 247 So. 3d 706, 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (holding 911 calls can be admitted “as either a spontaneous statement pursuant to section 90.803(1) ․ or an excited utterance pursuant to section 90.803(2), [Florida Statutes (2022)]”).

PER CURIAM.