Case Name: Christopher DUCKETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2008-07-02
Citations: 985 So. 2d 674
Docket Number: No. 4D07-1121
Parties: Christopher DUCKETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: POLEN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 985
Pages: 674–675

Head Matter:
Christopher DUCKETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 4D07-1121.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
July 2, 2008.
Frank Negron, Davie, for appellant.
Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Myra J. Fried, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for ap-pellee.

Opinion:
WARNER, J.
When charging the jury in appellant's trial for trafficking in LSD, the court omitted the word "knowingly" from the first element in the jury instruction, i.e., that appellant knowingly possessed LSD. At trial the defense submitted a correct trafficking instruction including the word "knowingly." However, the trial court did not read the word to the jury, and counsel did not object. Nevertheless, as we held in Nash v. State, 951 So.2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), the omission of the word "knowingly" in the trafficking instruction constitutes fundamental error where the element is disputed at trial. Here, appellant disputed his knowing possession of the drug. We reverse his conviction for trafficking in LSD and remand for a new trial consistent with this opinion. We affirm as to the remaining issue.
POLEN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.