¶1Leggett has appealed his conviction for aggravated child abuse. He alleges that the trial court erred in granting the state’s motion, pursuant to Section 92.53(1), Florida Statutes, to allow videotaping of the testimony of the child victim, on the ground that such procedure violated his right under the federal and state constitutions to face-to-face confrontation of witnesses against him. Under the facts presented herein, we affirm on the authority of Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988). See also Sampson v. State, 541 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).
548 So. 2d 249
548 So.2d 249
14 Fla.L.Weekly 1348
Leggett v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided June 2, 1989
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1989-06-02
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently August 1992
2 state decisions
Relies on 536 So. 2d 212 - Glendening v. State · Sampson v. State
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1989-06-02
View the full empirical analysis of this case →