Case ID: so2d_670/html/1178-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mildred Jean CARMICHAEL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 95-2304.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    April 3, 1996.
    
      Samek & Besser and Lawrence E. Besser, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Wanda Raiford, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
    Before LEVY, GERSTEN, and FLETCHER, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The record reflects that the trial court committed reversible error in curtailing the defendant’s cross-examination of the prosecution’s chief witness as to her possible motive, bias, or self-interest. The law in Florida is clear that evidence tending to establish that a witness appearing before the State for any reason other than to tell the truth should not be kept from the jury. A trial court’s refusal, in a criminal prosecution, to allow cross-examination of a witness concerning a pending civil action between that witness and the defendant is error. See Wooten v. State, 464 So.2d 640 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 475 So.2d 696 (Fla.1985).

Reversed.