Gladston Lingo v. the State of Florida

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: April 23, 2025
• Docket: 3D2024-0640
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed April 23, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-0640 Lower Tribunal No. F21-12467 ________________

Gladston Lingo, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Zachary James, Judge.

Clayton R. Kaeiser, for appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Camilo Montoya, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, LINDSEY and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32, 35 (Fla. 1985) (“In order

to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be

presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be

argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be

considered preserved.”); Burton v. State, 237 So. 3d 1138, 1141 (Fla. 3d

DCA 2018) (“Despite the fact that all relevant evidence is admissible, section

90.403 provides for the exclusion of relevant evidence if ‘its probative value

is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of

issues, misleading the jury, or needless presentation of cumulative

evidence.’” (quoting Taylor v. State, 855 So. 2d 1, 21–22 (Fla. 2003))); Perry

v. State, 395 So. 2d 170, 174 (Fla. 1980) (“Disclosure requirements for the

prosecution principally concern those matters not accessible to the defense

in the course of reasonably diligent preparation.”).