Case Name: Damien DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2003-01-22
Citations: 839 So. 2d 734
Docket Number: No. 4D02-236
Parties: Damien DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: WARNER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 839
Pages: 734–736

Head Matter:
Damien DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 4D02-236.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Jan. 22, 2003.
Order Denying Rehearing March 19, 2003.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Nan Ellen Foley, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Charlie Crist, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
KLEIN, J.
Appellant argues that the trial court committed fundamental error in failing to give a guilty knowledge jury instruction under Chicone v. State, 684 So.2d 736 (Fla.1996). We affirm.
Appellant was convicted of possession and delivery of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school based on the testimony of a confidential informant. The informant testified that, while he was driving, the appellant waved him over. The informant got out of his car and went onto appellant's porch, where appellant sold him cocaine.
Chicone requires that, where a defendant requests it, the jury must be instructed that the defendant have knowledge that the substance is illegal. In this case the instruction was not requested, but defendant argues that it was fundamental error not to give it.
Because guilty knowledge was not an issue in this case, in that the only position taken by the defendant was that he was not the person who sold the cocaine to the informant, any error in not giving a guilty knowledge instruction would not rise to the level of fundamental error. State v. Delva, 575 So.2d 643 (Fla.1991). We therefore affirm.
WARNER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.