Case No. 6D2024-2441Lower Tribunal No. 2022-CF-000016
RAFAEL ALFREDO MONTEJO LUNA,
Appellant,v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hendry County.
James D. Sloan, Judge.
March 27, 2026
MIZE, J.
Appellant, Rafael Alfredo Montejo Luna (“Luna”), appeals his finaljudgment and sentence for second-degree murder. Luna argues that the trial courterred by admitting evidence that Luna failed to appear at a previously agreed-uponmeeting with a law enforcement officer that was investigating the victim’s death.The trial court found that such evidence was admissible as evidence ofconsciousness of guilt, but Luna asserts that such evidence was not relevant toshow Luna’s consciousness of guilt where there was no evidence to establish that
Original opinion page 2
2Luna was informed that the meeting was mandatory or that there would be anypotential adverse consequences to Luna for not attending the meeting. While Lunadid not make this argument in the trial court, he asserts that the trial court’s errorconstituted fundamental error that can be raised for the first time on appeal.Based on the arguments presented by Luna on appeal, we find nofundamental error and affirm Luna’s judgment and sentence.In the trial court, Luna argued that the evidence that he failed to appear atthe meeting with law enforcement was improper evidence of him exercising hisconstitutional right to remain silent. As Luna did not make that argument onappeal, we have not addressed it. Our affirmance of Luna’s judgment and sentenceis without prejudice for Luna to file a petition for ineffective assistance of appellatecounsel.AFFIRMED.WOZNIAK and WHITE, JJ., concur.Blair Allen, Public Defender, and Kimberly Nolen Hopkins, Assistant PublicDefender, Bartow, for Appellant.James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Wendy Buffington, SeniorAssistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARINGAND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
Opinion text and original PDF from Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal · Source opinion