Watty v. State (78 So. 3d 16, 2011)

PER CURIAM.

Even indulging both of the very dubious propositions that the single ruling complained of on appeal was (a) properly preserved below and (b) in fact erroneous, we nonetheless affirm the conviction and sentence under review on the ground that, beyond a reasonable doubt, the ruling complained of could not have contributed to the verdict and was thus harmless. See Franqui v. State, 59 So.3d 82, 102 (Fla. 2011).

Affirmed.