State v. Barrow

Summary

The Florida Supreme Court reviewed whether a trial court abused its discretion by denying a deliberating jury’s request for specific witness transcripts without advising the jury that testimony could potentially be read back. The court held that the trial court erred and that the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the requested testimony involved conflicting evidence and important credibility issues. The court approved the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s decision granting Barrow a new trial.

Holdings

1. When a jury requests trial transcripts during deliberations, the trial court should deny the request for physical transcripts but must inform the jury of the possibility of requesting a read-back. The court must not use language that could mislead the jury into believing read-backs are prohibited.
2. The error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and Barrow was entitled to a new trial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a trial court abuses its discretion when it denies a deliberating jury's request for specific trial transcripts without informing the jury that it may request a read-back of testimony.
2. Whether the trial court's error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Disposition

approved