Case Name: Mark MIDDLETON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2000-05-31
Citations: 760 So. 2d 251
Docket Number: No. 3D99-107
Parties: Mark MIDDLETON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before COPE, GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 760
Pages: 251–252

Head Matter:
Mark MIDDLETON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 3D99-107.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 31, 2000.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Ivy R. Ginsberg, Special Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Margaret A. Brenan, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before COPE, GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Mark Middleton appeals his convictions for armed robbery, armed kidnapping, sexual battery, and two firearm-related charges. We think the trial court's rulings regarding the scope of the hearsay exception for statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment, see § 90.803(4), Fla. Stat. (1997), were within discretion. If there was any error — and we see none — it was entirely harmless given that the victim testified to the same information.
The consecutive mandatory minimum firearm sentences were permissible given that defendant-appellant Middleton first committed an armed robbery on the victim at a bus stop, and then compelled the victim to walk with him to a more secluded location, where he committed two sexual batteries at gunpoint. See Murray v. State, 491 So.2d 1120 (Fla.1986).
Affirmed.