Opinion ID: 1589788
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Victim-impact and character evidence during guilt phase

Text: ¶ 109. Goff also contends that the State, during the guilt phase, formally introduced improper victim-impact and character evidence through Brandy's husband, James. During the State's case-in-chief, James identified himself as Brandy's husband of eight years, reiterated that they had two children together, and stated where Brandy worked as well as what kind of work she did. James's testimony in no way touched upon Brandy's character. Nor did James testify during the guilt phase as to the impact his wife's murder had had on him or his children. [25] This issue is without merit, as the testimony concern[ed] the background ... of the victim and merely set the stage for the presentation of relevant evidence. Spicer v. State, 921 So.2d at 307.