Odeh v. State
82 So. 3d 915
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Odeh was convicted by jury of attempted first-degree murder and appeals the judgment and sentence.
- He contends the interrogating officer’s opinion on self-defense was improperly heard by the jury.
- He argues the jury instructions on justifiable use of deadly force were erroneous.
- He asserts trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the officer’s opinion and to the jury instructions.
- The issue preservation is disputed and the court ultimately affirms the judgment; no reversal for ineffective assistance.
- Det. Hardy’s interrogation video and cross-examination were admitted without defense objection; defense counsel agreed to the jury instructions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Officer opinion on self-defense during interrogation | Odeh | Odeh | Not fundamental error; preserved only with objection; error not grounds for reversal |
| Justifiable use of deadly force instruction | Odeh | Odeh | Erred in form but not fundamental; defense consented; affirmed on non-fundamental basis |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal | Odeh | Odeh | Not raised in proper post-conviction; no rare exception shown; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Battle v. State, 19 So.3d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (officer opinions on defenses raise questions of admissibility)
- Eugene v. State, 53 So.3d 1104 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (interrogation statements may be understood as interrogation techniques)
- J.B. v. State, 705 So.2d 1376 (Fla. 1998) (fundamental-error standard requires due-process impact)
- F.B. v. State, 852 So.2d 226 (Fla. 2003) (fundamental-error analysis for trial evidentiary claims)
- Brown v. State, 124 So.2d 481 (Fla.1960) (fundamental-error inquiry for appeal without objection)
- Consalvo v. State, 697 So.2d 805 (Fla.1997) (ineffective assistance generally not raisable on direct appeal)