Alfonso Bernard Moore v. State of Florida

Opinion

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D2024-1271 LT Case No. 2022-CF-8673

_____________________________

ALFONSO BERNARD MOORE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. R. Anthony Salem, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Ryan M. Belanger, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Miranda L. Butson, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

December 5, 2025

PER CURIAM.

As to the first issue, regarding admission of evidence, that Alfonso Bernard Moore (“Appellant”) raises on direct appeal, we affirm without further discussion. As to his second issue, Appellant claims that having the judge rather than a jury determine the underlying facts of whether he qualified for designation and sentencing as a Habitual Violent Felony Offender

2

pursuant to section 775.084(1)(b), Florida Statutes, is contrary to Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024), and thus unconstitutional. We affirm on this issue because if there was any error regarding the application of Erlinger, the record before this Court demonstrates conclusively that it was harmless error. See Capra v. State, 403 So. 3d 1063, 1064 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025).

AFFIRMED.

LAMBERT, EDWARDS, and KILBANE, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

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

_____________________________