Court Opinion

ID: 9908260
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-08 15:03:33.309285+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:06.553709
License: Public Domain

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                STATE OF FLORIDA
                 _____________________________

                       Case No. 5D23-554
                   LT Case No. 2022-CF-4825
                 _____________________________

JOHN HAYDEN,

    Appellant,

    v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

    Appellee.
                 _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
Jeb T. Branham, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Natalie R. Gossett,
Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kristie Regan, Assistant
Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

                        December 8, 2023

PER CURIAM.

     Appellant challenges his conviction for aggravated battery
with a deadly weapon and the prison sentence imposed following
trial. Appellant argues that error occurred when, during the direct
examination of the investigating officer, the prosecutor asked the
officer if she determined who was the primary aggressor in the
altercation between Appellant and the victim, to which the officer
answered that it was Appellant, see Zangroniz v. State, 358 So. 3d
827, 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“[T]he questioning of the officers
about who they viewed as the ‘aggressor’ improperly invaded the
province of the jury by soliciting witnesses’ opinions about the
merits of [the defendant’s] self-defense claim, and ultimately his
guilt or innocence.”), and then, during closing argument, when the
prosecutor reminded the jury of this testimony.

     Appellant concedes that his trial counsel raised no objections
to either the question and answer or the prosecutor’s comment
during closing argument. He relies on the fundamental error
doctrine for reversal. From our review of the record, we conclude
that no fundamental error occurred and, therefore, affirm.

    AFFIRMED.

LAMBERT, EISNAUGLE, and PRATT, JJ., concur.

                 _____________________________

    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
               _____________________________

                                2