Clements v. StateClements v. State
Appellant, defendant in the trial court, seeks review of a judgment and sentence of life imprisonment for first degree murder.
Appellant now challenges the court‘s failure to charge the jury of necessarily included lesser offenses of first degree murder because of the mandatory language of
We agree with appellant‘s contention that the language of the rule is mandatory. Brown v. State, Fla. 1968, 206 So.2d 377, 382; State v. Washington, Fla. 1972, 268 So.2d 901; Rayner v. State, Fla. 1973, 273 So.2d 759. However we cannot see where the court‘s failure to adhere to the rule calls for reversal, when defendant not only failed to object, but actually invited the error when, apparently for trial strategy reasons, he decided to waive the giving of the lesser included offenses charge.
Recently, this court on facts closely analogous to the instant case followed a long line of cases holding that a request for an instruction or an objection to a failure to give an instruction is a requirement to raising error on appeal, and we followed
Therefore, we have concluded that no reversible error has been demonstrated, and for the reasons stated, the judgment and sentence appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.