Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2009

Horn v. State

Horn v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided September 11, 2009 · No. 5D09-329 · Lawson, Evander, Cohen
17 So. 3d 342; 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 13483; 2009 WL 2900450 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)
Horn v. State

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

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 *343 jury was properly instructed on the elements of the charged offense.

AFFIRMED.

LAWSON, EVANDER and COHEN, JJ., concur.
1

. § 828.12(2), Fla. Slat. (2007).

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.