Burnette v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Burnette v. State

103 So. 3d 1059, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 338, 2013 WL 127446

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 10, 2013·No. No. 1D11-920·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges his conviction and sentence on four grounds. We need only address Appellant’s third contention: that the failure to give Standard Jury Instruction in Criminal Cases 3.7 regarding reasonable doubt was fundamental error. The State commendably concedes error on this point on the authority of Cavagnaro v. State, — So.3d-(Fla. 3d DCA 2012), which we adopt. Because we reverse on this point and remand for a new trial, we need not reach Appellant’s remaining contentions.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

WOLF, VAN NORTWICK, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges his conviction and sentence on four grounds. We need only address Appellant’s third contention: that the failure to give Standard Jury Instruction in Criminal Cases 3.7 regarding reasonable doubt was fundamental error. The State commendably concedes error on this point on the authority of Cavagnaro v. State, — So.3d-(Fla. 3d DCA 2012), which we adopt. Because we reverse on this point and remand for a new trial, we need not reach Appellant’s remaining contentions.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

WOLF, VAN NORTWICK, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

Burnette v. State, 103 So. 3d 1059, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 338, 2013 WL 127446 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

103 So. 3d 1059 (Burnette v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related