Heath v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Heath v. State

426 So. 2d 1106, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 27729

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 1, 1983·No. No. 82-1036·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant’s concession at the charge conference that the offense for which he was convicted was a lesser-included offense of the offense charged waived his right to assert on appeal that the jury should not have been instructed on the lesser-included offense, and his objection on the completely separate and totally unmeritorious ground that the trial court is not empowered to instruct on any lesser-included offenses unless requested by the defendant hardly preserves the point for our review. State v. Washington, 268 So.2d 901 (Fla.1972); Courson v. State, 414 So.2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendant’s concession at the charge conference that the offense for which he was convicted was a lesser-included offense of the offense charged waived his right to assert on appeal that the jury should not have been instructed on the lesser-included offense, and his objection on the completely separate and totally unmeritorious ground that the trial court is not empowered to instruct on any lesser-included offenses unless requested by the defendant hardly preserves the point for our review. State v. Washington, 268 So.2d 901 (Fla.1972); Courson v. State, 414 So.2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).

Affirmed.

Heath v. State, 426 So. 2d 1106, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 27729 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

426 So. 2d 1106 (Heath v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related