Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed November 18, 2020.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D20-457
Lower Tribunal Nos. 18-8711B & 18-8754
________________
Clayton Johnson,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Richard L.
Hersch, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Deborah Prager, Assistant Public
Defender, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Brian H. Zack, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, SCALES and HENDON, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See § 90.404(2) (a), Fla. Stat. (2018) ( providing that “[s]imilar fact
evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to prove a
material fact in issue, including, but not limited to, proof of . . . identity”); Silver v.
State,
278 So. 3d 337, 342-43 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (holding that, where an antecedent
crime is sufficiently similar to the charged crime and contains unique features to
indicate the same perpetrator, evidence of the earlier crime is admissible to establish
identity); Grier v. State,
27 So. 3d 97, 101 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (concluding that
collateral evidence did not overwhelm the evidence of the charged crime and
become a “feature of the trial,” considering that the trial court gave cautionary
instructions throughout the trial); see also Yisrael v. State,
993 So. 3d 952, 956-57
(Fla. 2008) (holding that a proponent of a business record may establish its
admissibility through a certification that complies with sections 90.803(6)(c) and
90.902(11) of the Florida Statutes; and that, for the evidence to be admissible: “(a)
the record was made at or near the time of the event; (2) was made by or from
information transmitted by a person with knowledge; (3) was kept in the course of
regularly conducted business activity; and (4) that it was made as a regular practice
of that business to make such a record.”).
2
