From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harden v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Dec 8, 1982
422 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. 82-13.

December 8, 1982.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Osceola County, Rom W. Powell, J.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Michael B. Jones, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard B. Martell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.


The appellant contends, inter alia, that the trial court erred in this case by:

1. Overruling objection to the prosecutor's references in opening statement and closing argument concerning the extent of the victim's surgery, when the charge of aggravated battery in this case was based on sub-section (b) rather than sub-section (a) of section 784.045 [(1)], Florida Statutes.

2. Denying the appellant's request for a Williams Rule instruction, assuming the admissibility of evidence at trial of a collateral crime.

While we recognize these errors, we also find that they were harmless in the context of the "jury-pardon" verdicts rendered in this case, and the overwhelming evidence of guilt, even from the appellant's own testimony, in regard to the convictions of discharging a firearm in public and carrying a concealed firearm. See Palmes v. State, 397 So.2d 648 (Fla.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 882, 102 S.Ct. 369, 70 L.Ed.2d 195 (1981); Williams v. State, 386 So.2d 538 (Fla. 1980).

Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

DAUKSCH and SHARP, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Harden v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Dec 8, 1982
422 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Harden v. State

Case Details

Full title:BESSIE LEE HARDEN, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Dec 8, 1982

Citations

422 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)