Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an appeal by the defendant, convicted of manslaughter and aggravated child abuse, centered on the trial court's interpretation and application of section 90.706 of the Florida Statutes. The defendant was charged after a child under his care died from a subdural hematoma, with the defense claiming an accidental fall as the cause. During the trial, the defense sought to cross-examine medical experts using a journal article by Dr. John Plunkett, which discussed short-fall pediatric head injuries. However, objections were raised by the state regarding the article's lack of authoritativeness, as attested by Dr. Thomas Truman, who contended that it was not widely accepted in the medical field. The trial court sustained the objection, disallowing the use of the article, as the defense could not establish its authoritativeness under section 90.706. This procedural ruling was instrumental in the appellate court's decision to affirm the convictions, with Judges Ervin, Allen, and Lewis concurring. The appellate court's affirmation underscores the necessity for the defense to meet evidentiary standards when using published materials for cross-examination purposes.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Conviction Based on Procedural Compliancesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no error in the trial court's procedural ruling under the statute.
Reasoning: The court concluded that since Whitfield did not meet the burden required under section 90.706, the exclusion of the article was appropriate, leading to the affirmation of his convictions.
Burden of Proof for Establishing Authoritativeness of Materialssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision emphasized the requirement for the defense to demonstrate the authoritativeness of the material when an expert witness denies it.
Reasoning: The trial court excluded the use of the article for cross-examination in both instances, reaffirming that the defense must demonstrate the authoritativeness of the material if the expert denies it.
Use of Published Materials for Cross-Examination under Florida Statutes Section 90.706subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that the defense failed to establish the authoritativeness of a medical article used for cross-examination, leading to its exclusion.
Reasoning: The trial court upheld the objection, ruling that the article could not be used for cross-examination since the defense failed to establish its authoritativeness.