CORDOVI v. STATE (2024)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Armando Lazaro CORDOVI, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D22-1393

Decided: April 03, 2024

Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY, and MILLER, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Nicholas A. Lynch, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

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), aff'd, 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.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network