DOMNIQUE LASHAY WILKERSON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Any error in rendering an HVFO sentence is harmless when the record demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have found the defendant qualified as an HVFO.
[1] Any error in rendering a Habitual Violent Felony Offender sentence is harmless when the record demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have foun…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDomnique Lashay Wilkerson was convicted and sentenced as a Habitual Violent Felony Offender in Duval County Circuit Court. Wilkerson appealed the conv…
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 Harmless Error Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________ Case No. 5D2024-0939 LT Case No. 2023-CF-008512-A _____________________________ DOMNIQUE LASHAY WILKERSON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. London M. Kite, Judge. Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and John M. Selden, Assistant Public Defender Chief, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Adam B. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. July 25, 2025
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Capra v. State, 403 So. 3d 1063, 1064 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025) (holding even if HVFO sentence was rendered in error, error is harmless); Jackson v. State, 410 So. 3d 4, 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025) (explaining harmless error inquiry is “whether the record demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have found” defendant qualified as an HFO); see also Luton
2 v. State, 934 So. 2d 7, 9 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (holding that because defendant made no timely objection to the trial court sitting as trier of fact on whether defendant qualified as an HVFO, the claim was not properly preserved for appellate review). LAMBERT, HARRIS, and KILBANE, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Luton v. State, 934 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- Capra v. State, 403 So. 3d 1063 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025)