Jamie Laiquan Frazier, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee. (2025)

In this Anders ^* appeal, Appellant challenges his judgment and sentence, entered after the jury found him guilty of trafficking in fentanyl, because law enforcement officers initially used information relayed to them by a person not recorded or listed by the Bay County Sheriff's Office as a confidential informant. The evidence at trial showed that the person was not a “confidential informant” as defined by section 914.28(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2023). And even if the statute applied, section 914.28(8) provides, “any failure to abide by this section may not be relied upon to create any additional right, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a defendant in a criminal proceeding.”

Because our independent review of the record did not reveal any properly preserved meritorious point which might support reversal of the judgment or sentence, and no fundamental error occurred, the judgment and sentence are affirmed. See Neal v. State, 142 So. 3d 883, 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); § 924.051(3), Fla. Stat.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Per Curiam.

Bilbrey, Kelsey, and Long, JJ., concur.