17 So. 3d 342

Michael Bernard HORN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D09-329.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Sept. 11, 2009.

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Robert E. Wildridge, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kellie A. Nielan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

Michael Horn appeals his conviction for animal cruelty.1 He correctly contends that it was error for the trial court to instruct the jury on the definition of “cruelty, torture, or torment.” The definition of these terms was unnecessary for a determination of Horn’s animal cruelty charge. However, no objection was made to these instructions at trial. Jury instructions are subject to the contemporaneous objection rule, and, absent an objection at trial, can be raised on appeal only if fundamental error occurred. State v. Weaver, 957 So.2d 586, 588 (Fla.2007). We conclude that no fundamental error occurred in this case, particularly given that the *343jury was properly instructed on the elements of the charged offense.

AFFIRMED.

LAWSON, EVANDER and COHEN, JJ., concur.

Horn v. State
17 So. 3d 342

Case Details

Name
Horn v. State
Decision Date
Sep 11, 2009
Citations

17 So. 3d 342

Jurisdiction
Florida

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!