CECIL BERNARD HOWARD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that an improper witness comment was harmless error given overwhelming evidence of guilt, but the sentence was improperly enhanced under habitual offender statutes.
Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery. During the trial, a witness made an improper comment about appellant dealing stolen property. The trial…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Self-Defense Jury Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from a conviction and sentence in an aggravated battery case.
The first point on appeal involves an improper comment by a state witness concerning alleged other bad conduct on the part of appellant. Even though the trial judge had ordered a limiting of the evidence regarding irrelevant other crimes committed, the witness blurted out the offensive comment that appellant was a dealer in stolen property. Because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming, the error in denying a mistrial was harmless. Palmes v. State, 397 So. 2d 648 (Fla.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 882, 102 S.Ct. 369, 70 L.Ed.2d 195 (1981); § 59.041, Fla.Stat. (1983); § 924.33, Fla.Stat. (1983).
The second point on appeal involves the refusal of the judge to instruct the jury on self-defense. The evidence did not warrant this instruction, thus no error. The third point on appeal attacks the sentence. As in Dominguez v. State, 461 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), the judge determined appellant fit the category of an habitual offender under section 775.-084, Florida Statutes (1983) and raised his guidelines score from a second degree felony to a first degree felony. As in Dominguez we reverse the sentence and remand the cause to the trial court for resentencing. Upon remand the trial judge may depart from the guidelines if he deems it appropriate.
Conviction AFFIRMED; sentence REVERSED and REMANDED.
ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. Florida, 454 U.S. 882 (U.S. 1981)
- Palmes v. State, 397 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 1981)
- Dominguez v. State, 461 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)