The basic definition of the term “hearsay” is “an out of court statement that only has evidentiary value for the truth of the matter asserted.” Hearsay is usually excluded from evidentiary hearings and trials since it’s presumed to be unreliable. Yet, there’s lots of exceptions to the general rule. An out of court declaration is only hearsay, and thus excluded, if the nature of the declaration is testimonial. If the extrajudicial declaration is not testimonial, it may still be admitted into evidence.
In the appeal in Bowens vs. State, the District Court tackled this matter as it related to a co-defendant’s recorded statements while in the rear of a police vehicle. The police gain information and confessions in this fashion pretty frequently. Two individuals sitting in the rear seat of a police vehicle attempting to get their stories the same inadvertently provide the police a confession.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal, following defendant’s appeal of a strong-armed robbery conviction, affirmed the circuit court’s refusal to exclude a surreptitiously recorded conversation containing admissions by the defendant while in the rear of a police vehicle, and upheld the trial court’s denial of a motion for a mistrial.
After being detained for strong-arm robbery, defendant and the driver of the car that he was a occupant, had been placed in the back of a patrol car. A hidden microphone recorded the conversation in which the defendant made admissions pertaining to the robbery. The 4th District Court of Appeal held that the taped statements of the defendant were admissible as a party admission under The Florida Rules of Evidence, and that the statements of the co-defendant were also admissible to put defendant’s statements into context (making the statements non-testimonial). The 4th District Court of Appeal also found that the statements were not instigated or facilitated by anybody for the primary reason of gathering evidence for a prosecution, but were a recording of a spontaneous dialogue. The District Court ruling contains an in depth discussion of Crawford vs.. Washington, along with other cases that have ruled on surreptitious tape recordings.
For additional information regarding Criminal Defense Attorney Miami FL , Attorney Miami FL and Attorney Miami FL you can contact our office at: The Law Offices of Rosenberg and Dye 201 South Biscayne Boulevard
28th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
(305)429-3285