Case ID: so2d_424/html/0758-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Phillip Thomas HICKS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
    No. 62079.
    Supreme Court of Florida.
    Dec. 22, 1982.
    Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender and Tatjana Ostapoff, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for petitioner.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Andrea T. Mohel, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution, the Fourth District Court of Appeal, in Hicks v. State, 411 So.2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), certified the following question as having great public importance:

May the harmless, error rule be applied where the only penalty instruction requested is for the main offense charged and the defendant is subsequently convicted of a lesser included offense?

We answer the question in the affirmative, on the basis of Lewis v. State, 419 So.2d 337 (Fla.1982), and approve the decision of the district court.

It is so ordered.

ADKINS, Acting C.J., and BOYD, OVERTON, McDonald and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.