HEADLEY v. STATE (2000)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,First District.

Brian C. HEADLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D99-3847.

Decided: October 17, 2000

Nancy Daniels, Public Defender, and Richard M. Summa, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Edward C. Hill, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

We affirm the conviction entered by the trial court. The trial court based the conviction for violation of probation solely on hearsay testimony. Ordinarily, hearsay testimony, by itself, is legally insufficient to support such a finding. See Soto v. State, 727 So.2d 1044, 1046 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). However, because defense counsel failed to object to the introduction of that testimony or present any argument whatsoever to the trial court challenging the sufficiency of the hearsay testimony, the issue was not preserved for appellate review. See Gay v. State, 679 So.2d 21 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Furthermore, we reject appellant's arguments that the Criminal Punishment Code, which became effective on October 1, 1998, is facially unconstitutional. See Hall v. State, 25 Fla. L. Weekly D2075 (Fla. 4th DCA August 30, 2000).

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM.

KAHN, WEBSTER and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network