Hidalgo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hidalgo v. State

364 So. 2d 817, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17059

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 14, 1978

DocketNo. 78-498

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 364 So. 2d 817 (Hidalgo v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hidalgo v. State, 364 So. 2d 817, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17059 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Alfredo Hidalgo, was found guilty of aggravated battery by a jury. On this appeal, reversal is urged upon two grounds: (1) that the court erred in refusing to instruct upon a claimed lesser-included offense of culpable negligence and (2) that the court’s charge upon the defense of self-defense was improper.

Our review of the record, including the accusatory pleading and the evidence before the trial court, establishes that the misdemeanor of culpable negligence was not, as contended by the appellant, a category four, lesser-included offense under the rule set forth in Brown v. State, 206 So.2d 377 (Fla.1968). Therefore, it was not error for the court to fail to charge on the misdemeanor. Further, the record demonstrates that there was no error in the charge to the jury on the burden of proof on the defense of self-defense. See the rule of law in Mathews v. State, 221 So.2d 431, 432 (Fla.2d DCA 1969).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Alfredo Hidalgo, was found guilty of aggravated battery by a jury. On this appeal, reversal is urged upon two grounds: (1) that the court erred in refusing to instruct upon a claimed lesser-included offense of culpable negligence and (2) that the court’s charge upon the defense of self-defense was improper.

Our review of the record, including the accusatory pleading and the evidence before the trial court, establishes that the misdemeanor of culpable negligence was not, as contended by the appellant, a category four, lesser-included offense under the rule set forth in Brown v. State, 206 So.2d 377 (Fla.1968). Therefore, it was not error for the court to fail to charge on the misdemeanor. Further, the record demonstrates that there was no error in the charge to the jury on the burden of proof on the defense of self-defense. See the rule of law in Mathews v. State, 221 So.2d 431, 432 (Fla.2d DCA 1969).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

364 So. 2d 817, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hidalgo-v-state-fladistctapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack