MANGHAM v. STATE (2021)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Danyan MANGHAM, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D20-0382

Decided: April 07, 2021

Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY and BOKOR, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. Dayes v. Werner Enterprises, Inc., No. 3D19-1920, 314 So. 3d 718, 722–23 (Fla. 3d DCA Jan. 27, 2021) (quoting Linn v. Fossum, 946 So. 2d 1032, 1037-38 (Fla. 2006)) (“an expert's testimony ‘may not merely be used as a conduit for the introduction of the otherwise inadmissible evidence’ ”); 50 State Sec. Serv., Inc. v. Giangrandi, 132 So. 3d 1128, 1136 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (“Where a trial court has weighed probative value against prejudicial impact before reaching its decision, an appellate court shall not overturn such a decision absent a clear abuse of discretion.”) (internal citations omitted); Osagie v. State, 58 So. 3d 307, 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (finding error in admitting business records “without a custodian of the records or other qualified person testifying as to the accuracy of the records”).

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Out of date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