final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion
under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Steven B.
Thomas, Public Defender, and Kevin Steiger, Assistant Public
Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Moody, Attorney General, and Sharon S. Traxler, Assistant
Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
and Winokur, JJ., concur; B.L. Thomas, J., concurring in
result only with opinion.
Thomas, J., concurring in result only.
concur in result. Although the State declined to make an
argument that even if the ruling was error, the error was
harmless, we are obligated to consider whether any ruling
below was harmless. § 924.051(7), Fla. Stat. (2017);
Goodwin v. State, 751 So.2d 537, 545 (Fla. 1999);
Heuss v. State, 687 So.2d 823 (Fla. 1997). I
conclude that if error occurred, it was harmless.
Appellant was convicted of one count of attempted
second-degree murder by discharging a firearm causing great
bodily harm, one count of attempted second-degree murder by
discharging a firearm, one count of possession of a firearm
by a felon, and one count of shooting into an occupied
vehicle. He was sentenced to a mandatory term of life in
prison under the state's 10-20-Life statute for count
one, a term of thirty years in prison for the second count of
attempted murder, with both sentences including a mandatory
prison term of thirty years under the Prison Releasee
Reoffender Act, and mandatory prison terms of fifteen-years
in prison for shooting into an occupied vehicle and
possession of a firearm by a felon under the Prison Releasee
Reoffender Act, as Appellant committed the crimes within
three years of his release from a prior prison sentence for a
case involved a drug transaction where Appellant provided
twenty-dollars' worth of heroin at no charge to the two
victims, a man and woman, and expected them, or at least the
female victim, to spend time with Appellant and his
girlfriend in exchange for the drugs. When the victims
declined the invitation, the evidence proved that Appellant
shot five times at the victims' vehicle in anger as it
left Appellant's property. The male victim positively
identified Appellant as the shooter and described the gun,
and no evidence established that Appellant's girlfriend
shot a firearm other than her anger at the victims because
the female victim would not stay with Appellant.
those bullets Appellant shot entered the female victim's
skull, where it remains, causing a severe, near-fatal brain
injury. The victim's mother testified that her daughter
"will never be the same" and requires constant
care. The force of the gunshot almost pushed the female
victim out of the car.
Appellant was shooting into the victims' car, the male
victim managed to drive away. The female victim did not
remember anything after hearing Appellant's girlfriend
say, "Do it Josh" to Appellant, and then hearing
the male victim telling the female victim, "I can't
believe he done that," while assuring her he had called
an ambulance. This latter statement ...