OSCAR G. ESTRADA
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Any error in applying a particular version of the sexual battery statute is harmless when the victim's testimony and other evidence is sufficient to support conviction under both the 2014 and 2022 versions of the statute.
[1] Any error in applying a particular version of a criminal statute is harmless when the evidence is sufficient to support conviction under all versions of the statute at is…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We need not address the 'wrong version of the statute' argument because the victim's testimony and other evidence was sufficient to convict Appellant under the 'sexual battery' definitions in both the 2014 and 2022 versions of section 794.011, Florida Statutes. Thus, no fundamental error occurred because the convictions could have been obtained without the assistance of the alleged error.”
Court's reasoning for affirming the conviction despite the statute version issue
Oscar Geovanni Estrada was convicted of sexual battery in the Circuit Court for Palm Beach County. The appeal raised an issue regarding which version …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sexual Battery cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
OSCAR GEOVANNI ESTRADA, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2024-1170
[August 13, 2025]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Daliah H. Weiss, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2022CF007022AMB.
Daniel Eisinger, Public Defender, and Ian Seldin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Paul Patti, III, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Bartels v. State, 410 So. 3d 21, 22 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025) (“We need not address the ‘wrong version of the statute’ argument because the victim’s testimony and other evidence was sufficient to convict Appellant under the ‘sexual battery’ definitions in both the 2014 and 2022 versions of section 794.011, Florida Statutes. Thus, no fundamental error occurred because the convictions could have been obtained without the assistance of the alleged error.”).
MAY, FORST and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.