Court Opinion

ID: 7571799
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 06:14:41.495899+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:24:22.328517
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
The primary issue on appeal was not raised before the trial court. The error was not fundamental. Gibson v. State, 533 So.2d 338 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) (on motion for rehearing). See also Coy v. Iowa, — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 2798, 101 L.Ed.2d 857 (1988); Glendening v. State, 536 So.2d 212 (Fla.1988). The issue therefore has been waived. Cf. Ray v. State, 403 So.2d 956 (Fla.1981); Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla.1978); Gibson v. State; Register v. State, 514 So.2d 1122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Young v. State, 506 So.2d 13 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 515 So.2d 231 (Fla.1987); Chambers v. State, 504 So.2d 476 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).
Additionally, we conclude that there is no reasonable possibility that the error affected the verdict, and that it therefore was harmless. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986). See also Coy v. Iowa. We also find no error in the sentencing. Therefore, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.
HERSEY, C.J., and LETTS and STONE, JJ., concur.