From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bogdanon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jan 14, 2000
763 So. 2d 376 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

holding that admission of hearsay medical records in battery prosecution was harmless error where they were cumulative of the doctor's testimony

Summary of this case from Roop v. State

Opinion

No. 2D99-582

Opinion filed January 14, 2000

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Daniel L. Perry, Judge.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Bruce P. Taylor, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Stephen D. Ake, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


Oleg Bogdanon appeals his conviction and sentence for aggravated battery. We affirm the conviction, but remand for resentencing.

Bogdanon first argues that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay statements describing the contents of medical records. Although we agree that the hearsay statements were not admissible, the statements were cumulative of the treating doctor's direct testimony regarding the victim's injuries. We, therefore, conclude that the error was harmless in this case.

As to the sentence imposed, Bogdanon argues that the trial court erred in utilizing the deadly weapon enhancement in section 775.087(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), because the use of a weapon was an essential element of the offense. The trial court utilized the deadly weapon enhancement to increase the crime from a second to a first degree felony. Section 775.087(1)(b) precludes reclassification if the crime charged requires the use of a weapon as one of its elements. See Dozier v. State, 677 So.2d 1352 (Fla.2d DCA 1996).

The information charged that the battery was committed with the use of a deadly weapon. The jury was instructed that the State was required to prove that Bogdanon caused great bodily harm "and/or" used a deadly weapon. Because the evidence supports a finding that Bogdanon used a deadly weapon, we are unable to say that the jury did not utilize that alternative.

The State argues that we should affirm because this issue was not presented below. We rejected this argument in Dozier, citing Senterfitt v. State, 515 So.2d 411 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for resentencing.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., Concur.


Summaries of

Bogdanon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jan 14, 2000
763 So. 2d 376 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

holding that admission of hearsay medical records in battery prosecution was harmless error where they were cumulative of the doctor's testimony

Summary of this case from Roop v. State
Case details for

Bogdanon v. State

Case Details

Full title:OLEG BOGDANON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Jan 14, 2000

Citations

763 So. 2d 376 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Roop v. State

The first possibility is easily disposed of. As substantive evidence of Mr. Roop's guilt, the evidence was…

Garzon v. State

of "and/or" with principals instruction); Dorsett v. McRay, 901 So.2d 225 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (failure to…