Date: 05-18-2016

Case Style: Alan Edward Cramer v. State of Florida

Case Number: 4D14-2979

Judge: W. Matthew Stevenson

Court: DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

Plaintiff's Attorney: Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Assistant Attorney General

Defendant's Attorney: James L. Eisenberg and Kai Li Aloe Fouts of Eisenberg & Fouts, P.A.

Description: After an altercation with Jessica Leder, hitting her with his car, and shooting into her house, Cramer was charged with aggravated assault with a firearm, felon in possession of a firearm, and shooting into a building. At trial, the State introduced eleven statements made by Cramer in jail call recordings. Cramer argues the trial court erred in admitting the following three statements because they were extremely inflammatory and any probative value was substantially outweighed by their highly prejudicial effect.

“I don’t give a f---. What are they gonna do? Play it in court? F--- the judge; f--- all these mother-f---ers. F---ed up, huh? F--- the judge, I don’t even want to—I’m tired of all this sh--, man.”
“That whole plan with fire when I beat this bi--- better evacuate—evacuate from this city, that’s on my momma.”
“These people are going to have to take my life in this courtroom because if I get out (laughs) people better evacuate.” In Singer v. State, 647 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), we considered whether the probative value of a statement made by the defendant was substantially outweighed by the risk of substantial prejudice. After being arrested, on the way to the police station, the defendant said, “When I get out, f--- the judge, f--- the jury. I’ll just blow your head off.” Id. at 1021. The trial court admitted the statement over the defendant’s objection. On appeal, the defendant argued the statement did not prove any element of the offense. We agreed and reversed, finding the statement was not harmless error because it “constituted not only a threat to the officer but evinced a threat to and disrespect for both the judge and jury.”

Outcome: In Singer v. State, 647 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), we considered whether the probative value of a statement made by the defendant was substantially outweighed by the risk of substantial prejudice. After being arrested, on the way to the police station, the defendant said, “When I get out, f--- the judge, f--- the jury. I’ll just blow your head off.” Id. at 1021. The trial court admitted the statement over the defendant’s objection. On appeal, the defendant argued the statement did not prove any element of the offense. We agreed and reversed, finding the statement was not harmless error because it “constituted not only a threat to the officer but evinced a threat to and disrespect for both the judge and jury.”

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: