Mack v. State

Hosea Mack seeks to reverse a final judgment and conviction. We affirm.

Mack seeks a new trial, arguing the trial court reversibly erred when it allowed the prosecution’s expert fingerprint witness to testify that certain latent fingerprints taken at a crime scene two years earlier matched the defendant’s fingerprints, without having authenticated the latents with the testimony of the police detective who actually lifted the prints at the crime scene. We review the trial court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of *1012discretion. Roosevelt v. State, 42 So.3d 293, 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (holding that…