 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Nagel v. State12/27/2000
the jury chose to believe appellant's or the officers' version of the events that transpired that night. Because we cannot conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the admission of this testimony did not affect the jury's verdict in this case, we hold that appellant must be granted a new trial.
Accordingly, we reverse appellant's conviction and sentence for driving under the influence and remand for a new trial.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
SHAHOOD, J., concurs.
STONE, J., dissents with opinion.
STONE, J., dissenting.
I would affirm. In my judgment, applying the standard in Goodwin v. State, 751 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 1999), the verdict was not affected by this error. The jury patently believed the state's evidence and did not believe Appellant. Given the other damaging information in the record, admitting the rebuttal evidence was harmless error.
|