HARMLESS ERROR ANALYSIS APPLIES TO ERLINGER ON PRR ENHANCEMENT
Not submitting the prior convictions to the jury to determine if he was PRR was harmless, because the jury would have found the Defendant had the prior convictions.
Alonso v. State, _ So.3d _ (Fla. 2nd DCA 2025):
Any error in the trial court's determining that Alonso met the statutory requirements to be designated a prison releasee reoffender and a habitual felony offender is harmless based on the record before us. See Jackson v. State, 4D2024-0819, 2025 WL 1119094, at *1, *6 (Fla. 4th DCA Apr. 16, 2025) (concluding that any error in failing to submit sentence enhancement factors to the jury pursuant to Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024), was harmless where State's evidence " 'demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have found' that appellant qualified [for the sentence enhancement]" (quoting Galindez v. State, 955 So. 2d 517, 523 (Fla. 2007))); Ashford v. State, 5D2024-0070, 2025 WL 727808, at *1 (Fla. 5th DCA Mar. 7, 2025) (reviewing prison releasee reoffender sentence and concluding that if any Erlinger "error occurred here, such an error would be harmless"); Capra v. State, 403 So. 3d 1063, 1064 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025) ("[E]ven if the [habitual violent felony offender] sentence was rendered in error, the error is harmless on this record."); cf. Galindez, 955 So. 2d at 522-23 (holding that harmless error analysis applies to error alleged pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and its progeny).