STEVEN PALMER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
STEVEN PALMER, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
401 So. 2d 1177
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1981)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
In an opinion filed on June 24, 1981, we held that because of the amount of evidence supporting appellant’s conviction, any error committed by the trial court in failing to instruct the jury on penalties was harmless. Subsequently, the Florida Supreme Court has ruled that the harmless error rule cannot be applied in such a manner to the error involved herein. See Murray v. State, 403 So. 2d 417 (Fla.1981) and Tascano v. State, 393 So. 2d 540 (Fla.1981).
Accordingly, our opinion of June 24,1981, is hereby withdrawn, the judgment of conviction is hereby reversed and this cause is remanded for a new trial in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Tasca-no, supra.
ANSTEAD, HERSEY, and GLICK-STEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 407 So. 2d 1074 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…this mandatory duty could be circumvented on the basis of the harmless error rule, the effect of the mandatory provision in the rule would be negated. (Emphasis added.) See, too, Williams v. State, 399 So. 2d 999 (Fla.3d DCA 1981); Palmer v. State, 401 So. 2d 1177, (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). Accordingly, the judgment and sentence appealed from are reversed and the cause is remanded for a new trial. ANSTEAD and HURLEY, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Tascano v. State, 393 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 1980)
- Murray v. State, 403 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1981)