Case ID: so2d_636/html/0590-01.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

Mark FREUNDLICH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 93-1804.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    May 13, 1994.
    James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Daniel J. Schafer, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Wesley Heidt, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Although the trial court allowed two proffered hearsay statements of the child-victim to be used at Freundlich’s sexual battery trial, plus the child’s own testimony, there is no apparent reversible error demonstrated. Pardo v. State, 596 So.2d 665 (Fla.1992). Compliance with the requirements of section 90.803(23), Florida Statutes, was satisfactory in this case. See State v. Townsend, 635 So.2d 949 (Fla.1994).

AFFIRMED.

COBB, W. SHARP and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.