Hurtado v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hurtado v. State

546 So. 2d 1176, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1859, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4398, 1989 WL 86792

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 2, 1989

DocketNo. 88-02501

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 546 So. 2d 1176 (Hurtado 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

Hurtado v. State, 546 So. 2d 1176, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1859, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4398, 1989 WL 86792 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm defendant’s convictions for trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. See Huff v. State, 537 So.2d 1130 (Fla.2d DCA 1989); McElrath v. State, 516 So.2d 276 (Fla.2d DCA 1987).

This case provides a propitious occasion to reiterate the following statement made by this court in Smith v. Mogelvang, 432 So.2d 119, 125 (Fla.2d DCA 1983):

Unnecessary departures from the standard jury instructions may undermine the unquestionably beneficial effect of those forms on the Florida trial system as a whole. That system depends in large part for its fairness and effective functioning upon reasonably predictable rules and rulings in the conduct of trials. Those instructions “state as accurately as a group of experienced lawyers and judges could state the law of Florida in simple understandable language.” In re: Use by the Trial Courts of the Standard Jury Instructions, 198 So.2d 319, 319 (Fla.1967).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm defendant’s convictions for trafficking in cocaine and conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. See Huff v. State, 537 So.2d 1130 (Fla.2d DCA 1989); McElrath v. State, 516 So.2d 276 (Fla.2d DCA 1987).

This case provides a propitious occasion to reiterate the following statement made by this court in Smith v. Mogelvang, 432 So.2d 119, 125 (Fla.2d DCA 1983):

Unnecessary departures from the standard jury instructions may undermine the unquestionably beneficial effect of those forms on the Florida trial system as a whole. That system depends in large part for its fairness and effective functioning upon reasonably predictable rules and rulings in the conduct of trials. Those instructions “state as accurately as a group of experienced lawyers and judges could state the law of Florida in simple understandable language.” In re: Use by the Trial Courts of the Standard Jury Instructions, 198 So.2d 319, 319 (Fla.1967).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

546 So. 2d 1176, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1859, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4398, 1989 WL 86792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurtado-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack