Case Name: Daniel Esteve QUINTANA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1979-01-16
Citations: 367 So. 2d 1028
Docket Number: No. 78-376
Parties: Daniel Esteve QUINTANA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 367
Pages: 1028–1028

Head Matter:
Daniel Esteve QUINTANA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 78-376.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jan. 16, 1979.
Rehearing Denied March 16, 1979.
Pollack, Spain & O’Donnell, John H. Li-pinski, Miami, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Anthony C. Musto, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The defendant was found guilty by a jury of manslaughter. On this appeal, it is urged that the court erred in finding the evidence sufficient to prove defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. An examination of the record shows this ground not to be well taken. See Taylor v. State, 139 Fla. 542, 190 So. 691 (1939).
The second point claims error upon the denial of defendant's motion for mistrial upon a claim that evidence of a collateral crime was not relevant to the questions in issue. See Williams v. State, 110 So.2d 654 (Fla.1959). The evidence presented was clearly relevant to prove recklessness under Section 782.07, Florida Statutes (1977). See Jackson v. State, 100 So.2d 839 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958), and Fowlkes v. State, 100 So.2d 826 (Fla.3d DCA 1957).
The third and fourth points claim error upon the jury instruction. The record shows that no objection was made at the trial to this instruction. We, therefore, find no error. See Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.390(d), and Bell v. State, 178 So.2d 131 (Fla.2d DCA 1965).
Affirmed.