MAYKEL CASTILLO
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.
The trial court's judgment was affirmed because any alleged error did not constitute fundamental error affecting the validity of the trial.
[1] Fundamental error in a criminal trial is error that reaches into the validity of the trial itself such that a guilty verdict could not have been obtained without the assi…
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 intelligence“fundamental error is one 'that reach[es] down into the validity of the trial itself to the extent that a verdict of guilty could not have been obtained without the assistance of the alleged error.'”
Court's statement of the legal standard for fundamental error, citing Johnson v. State, 397 So. 3d 626, 638 (Fla. 2024)
Maykel Castillo appealed a conviction from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County. The appeal involved review of whether fundamental error occurred a…
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.
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed October 22, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1883 Lower Tribunal No. F20-10686 ________________
Maykel Castillo, Appellant,
vs.
State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Laura Shearon Cruz, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Shannon Hemmendinger, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Ivy R. Ginsberg, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before EMAS, LOGUE and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2
Affirmed. See Johnson v. State, 397 So. 3d 626, 638 (Fla. 2024) (“[F]undamental error is one ‘that reach[es] down into the validity of the trial itself to the extent that a verdict of guilty could not have been obtained without the assistance of the alleged error.’”) (quoting Kocaker v. State, 311 So. 3d 814, 824 (Fla. 2020)); Daymon v. State, 744 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); see also Smith v. State, 3D24-0654, 2025 WL 2714446 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 24, 2025); Warren v. State, 307 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sanzaro v. Crowe, 397 So. 3d 626 (Fla. 6th DCA 2025)
- Warren v. State, 307 So. 3d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)
- Daymon v. State, 744 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)