Case Name: Durward Spence FAULK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-01-24
Citations: 573 So. 2d 199
Docket Number: No. 90-505
Parties: Durward Spence FAULK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: PETERSON, J., and FOWLER, R.J., Associate Judge, concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 573
Pages: 199–199

Head Matter:
Durward Spence FAULK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 90-505.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Jan. 24, 1991.
Wafford H. Stidham of Boswell, Stid-ham, Conner & Wilson, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Anthony J. Golden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
DAUKSCH, Judge.
We affirm the conviction of appellant and certify the same question we certified in Armstrong v. State, 566 So.2d 943 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) as being of great public importance.
DOES TRIAL COUNSEL FOR A DEFENDANT WAIVE FOR HIS CLIENT FUTURE OBJECTION TO FAILURE TO GIVE THE FULL AND COMPLETE INITIAL INSTRUCTION ON JUSTIFIABLE AND EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE AS PART OF THE MANSLAUGHTER INSTRUCTION WHEN THE TRIAL ATTORNEY SPECIFICALLY REQUESTS AN ABBREVIATED INSTRUCTION, WHICH OTHERWISE WOULD CONSTITUTE FUNDAMENTAL ERROR?
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON, J., and FOWLER, R.J., Associate Judge, concur.