Davis v. State
100 So. 3d 1152, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8881, 2012 WL 2011383
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Davis v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 9786 →
Opinion
Davis was charged with and convicted of attempted premeditated murder and now appeals. We reverse for a new trial because of two fundamental errors in the jury instructions:
1. The court omitted entirely any definition of “excusable homicide.” See State v. Lucas, 645 So.2d 425 (Fla.1994); Rojas v. State, 552 So.2d 914 (Fla.1989); Richardson v. State, 818 So.2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
2. The charge on attempted voluntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense required an intent to kill, which, as we have held in Coiscou v. State, 43 So.3d 123 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) and Bass v. State, 45 So.3d 970 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), is per se reversible error. On this point, we certify conflict with Williams v. State, 40 So.3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), review granted, 64 So.3d 1262 (Fla.2011).
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Davis v. State, 100 So. 3d 1152, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8881, 2012 WL 2011383 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).
100 So. 3d 1152 (Davis v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Richardson v. State
818 So. 2d 679 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
State v. Lucas
645 So. 2d 425 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1994)
Rojas v. State
552 So. 2d 914 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)
Williams v. State
40 So. 3d 72 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Bass v. State
45 So. 3d 970 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Coiscou v. State
43 So. 3d 123 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)