Fieldhouse v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fieldhouse v. State

854 So. 2d 837, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 14057, 2003 WL 22148776

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 19, 2003

DocketNo. 5D02-2302

StatusPublished

This text of 854 So. 2d 837 (Fieldhouse v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fieldhouse v. State, 854 So. 2d 837, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 14057, 2003 WL 22148776 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

GRIFFIN, J.

Appellant, Wayne M. Fieldhouse [“Fieldhouse”], appeals his conviction for capital sexual battery upon a child less than twelve years of age by causing his finger to penetrate the victim’s vagina. He complains of the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and the giving of a jury instruction defining “penetration.” We find no error and affirm. The record shows the State presented competent evidence to establish the elements of the offense charged, including testimony that Fieldhouse’s finger penetrated the child victim’s vágina. As to the jury instruction, although it may have been largely irrelevant under the facts of this case, there was no reasonable possibility that the giving of the instruction contributed to the conviction. Thus, any error was harmless. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986).

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER and MONACO, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

GRIFFIN, J.

Appellant, Wayne M. Fieldhouse [“Fieldhouse”], appeals his conviction for capital sexual battery upon a child less than twelve years of age by causing his finger to penetrate the victim’s vagina. He complains of the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and the giving of a jury instruction defining “penetration.” We find no error and affirm. The record shows the State presented competent evidence to establish the elements of the offense charged, including testimony that Fieldhouse’s finger penetrated the child victim’s vágina. As to the jury instruction, although it may have been largely irrelevant under the facts of this case, there was no reasonable possibility that the giving of the instruction contributed to the conviction. Thus, any error was harmless. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986).

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER and MONACO, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

854 So. 2d 837, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 14057, 2003 WL 22148776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fieldhouse-v-state-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack