Case Name: Camillo SALAS-TRIANA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-02-28
Citations: 669 So. 2d 306
Docket Number: No. 95-0282
Parties: Camillo SALAS-TRIANA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: GLICKSTEIN, DELL and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 669
Pages: 306–306

Head Matter:
Camillo SALAS-TRIANA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 95-0282.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Feb. 28, 1996.
Certification of Question Denied March 26, 1996.
Fredrick R. Susaneck of Essen, Essen, Susaneck, Canet and Lipson, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Barry E. Krischer, State Attorney, Ira D. Karmelin, Assistant State Attorney, West Palm Beach, Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Joan Fowler, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
On the first issue raised by appellant, pursuant to our decision, in State v. Haddix, 668 So.2d 1064 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), we answer the following certified question, as modified, in the negative, and affirm the trial court.
WHETHER THE STATE MUST ALLEGE PRIOR DUI CONVICTIONS IN THE CHARGING DOCUMENT BEFORE A DEFENDANT, CHARGED AND CONVICTED OF MISDEMEANOR DUI, CAN RECEIVE AN ENHANCED MISDEMEANOR DUI PENALTY UNDER SECTION 316.193(2)(a), FLORIDA STATUTES.
As for the second issue, we also find no error and affirm. The amendment to the information during trial was permissible. See State v. Anderson, 537 So.2d 1373 (Fla.1989). The defendant was not prejudiced by the amendment, in light of the notice provided by citation to the applicable statute in the original information.
GLICKSTEIN, DELL and KLEIN, JJ., concur.