M.H., a Juvenile, Appellant, v. STATE (2019)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

M.H., a Juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-312

Decided: March 20, 2019

Before SALTER, SCALES, and MILLER, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Shannon Hemmendinger, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla H. McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Joseph v. State, 868 So.2d 5, 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“[The defendant] was not asked for his opinion of the detective’s credibility. [He] was not required to choose between conceding the point or branding the detective as a liar. Asking whether another witness is ‘wrong,’ ‘not accurate,’ or ‘mistaken’ is very different from asking whether the witness is a liar.”) (internal citations omitted); U.S. v. Gaines, 170 F.3d 72, 82 (1st Cir. 1999) (“The witness was not required to choose between conceding the point or branding another witness as a liar.”); U.S. v. Gaind, 31 F.3d 73, 77 (2d Cir. 1994) (“Asking a witness whether a previous witness who gave conflicting testimony is ‘mistaken’ highlights the objective conflict without requiring the witness to condemn the prior witness a purveyor of deliberate falsehood, i.e., a ‘liar.’ ”).

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Out of date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