HENRY v. STATE (2017)

Appellant challenges the trial court's denial of two pretrial motions to suppress regarding a recording the victim made on her cell phone of a conversation with Appellant in which he made threats in an apparent attempt to extort money from her. It is well-settled that “to raise an error on appeal, a contemporaneous objection must be made at the trial level when the alleged error occurred.” Carr v. State, 156 So.3d 1052, 1062 (Fla. 2015) (quoting J.B. v. State, 705 So.2d 1376, 1378 (Fla. 1998)). Although section 90.104(1), Florida Statutes (2012), provides that, “[i]f the court has made a definitive ruling on the record admitting ․ evidence, either at or before trial, a party need not renew an objection ․ to preserve a claim of error for appeal,” the statute does not apply to the circumstances in the instant case. Here, the trial court denied both of Appellant's motions to suppress and ruled the recording was admissible. Subsequently, at trial, the State moved to introduce the recording, and Appellant's counsel affirmatively stated, “no objection.” Pursuant to the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Carr, counsel's statement of “no objection” acted to abandon or waive the prior motions to suppress. See 156 So.3d at 1062. Accordingly, this issue was not preserved for appeal, and we affirm without further discussion.

PER CURIAM.

WOLF, RAY, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.