Janurio Perez, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee. (2025)

Affirmed. See Quattrocchi v. State, 17 So. 3d 329, 332 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (providing that an appellate court reviews a trial court's ruling permitting an amendment of the criminal information under an abuse of discretion standard); Bozeman v. State, 714 So. 2d 570, 572 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (stating that an appellate court reviews a trial court's decision regarding giving or withholding a proposed jury instruction under an abuse of discretion standard); § 794.0115(2), Fla. Stat. (2023) (providing that under Florida's “Dangerous Sexual Felony Offender Act,” in order to impose a 50-year minimum mandatory sentence enhancement to the charged offense, one of the elements the State is required to prove is that the person committed the offense when he or she was 18 years of age or older); DuBoise v. State, 520 So. 2d 260, 265 (Fla. 1998) (finding that an information gives sufficient notice of the necessary elements for an enhancement or an offense when it contains a specific statutory citation to that enhancement or offense); State v. Garcia, 692 So. 2d 984, 985 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (“The State may also substantively amend an information during trial, even over the defendant's objection, unless there is a showing of prejudice to the substantive rights of the defendant.”); State v. Conte, 516 So. 2d 1115, 1115-16 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (finding that in deciding whether to allow the amendment of an information, the prejudice to the defendant the trial court considers includes prejudice in the preparation of a defense).

PER CURIAM.