ERIC CARDOSO vs STATE OF FLORIDA

Opinion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

ERIC CARDOSO,

Appellant,

Case No. 5D22-1152

v. LT Case No. 2021-MM-35790

STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

________________________________/ Opinion filed October 28, 2022

Appeal from the County Court for Brevard County, Aaron Peacock, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Joseph Chloupek, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Daniel P. Caldwell, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (“Police officers and lay witnesses have long been permitted to testify as to their observations of a defendant’s acts, conduct, and appearance, and also to give an opinion on the defendant’s state of impairment based on those observations.”); City of Orlando v. Newell, 232 So. 2d 413, 413 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970) (holding that where police officer in prosecution for driving under influence of intoxicating beverages described to trial court, before expressing opinion, the defendant’s acts, conduct, appearance and statements as seen and heard by officer, officer’s opinion testimony that defendant was under influence of intoxicating beverages to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired was properly admitted).1

LAMBERT, C.J., EVANDER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

We also reject appellant's contention that the prosecutor below 1

engaged in improper closing argument.