RICARDO THOMPSON, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Glover v. State, 863 So. 2d 236 (Fla. 2003)
  …District and Third District’s holding that the age of the defendant is an element of capital sexual battery under section 794.011(2). We approve the Fifth District’s decision to affirm Glover’s conviction in this case on the basis of Reed v. State, 887 So. 2d 366 (Fla.2002). Glover’s claim was based upon fundamental error in the standard jury instruction. Glover’s age of over eighteen years was, however, not a disputed element. We therefore approve the Fifth District’s decision in this case and the Third Di…
• Haygood v. State, 54 So. 3d 1035 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
  …ndamental error identified in Montgomery is rendered harmless by the instruction on manslaughter by culpable negligence. It is useful to consider that a fundamental error must be harmful before it can be classified as fundamental. See Reed v. State, 887 So. 2d 366, 870 (Fla.2002) (“By its very nature, fundamental error has to be considered harmful. If the error was not harmful, it would not meet our requirement for being fundamental.”). I simply fail to see the logic by which a fundamental error of this kind…
• Bruce v. State, 879 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
  …e been misled.” Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263, 1265 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (citing Wadman v. State, 750 So. 2d 655, 658 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)). Fundamental error, as exists in this case, is harmful error, and necessarily prejudicial. See Reed v. State, 887 So. 2d 366, 370 (Fla.2002) (“Thus, for error to meet this standard [fundamental error], it must follow that the error prejudiced the defendant. Therefore, all fundamental error is harmful error.”). Thus, because the jury instruction constituted reversible erro…

Authorities Cited

• Cary Michael Lambrix v. State, 698 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 1996)