Case ID: so2d_253/html/0720-01.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

Anthony L. TRIMMING, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 71-592.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Oct. 26, 1971.
    Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kimler, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
    Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joel D. Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
    Before SWANN, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant was found guilty by a jury and adjudicated guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony, to wit: Grand Larceny. On this appeal it is urged that the trial court erred in allowing a rebuttal witness to testify over appellant’s objection. The rebuttal witness was properly called to rebut by prior, inconsistent statements the testimony of the appellant given in his own behalf. Barkley v. State, 152 Fla. 147, 10 So.2d 922 (1942).

Affirmed.