McCray v. State

846 So. 2d 1253, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 8720, 2003 WL 21338612
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 11, 2003·No. No. 1D01-3917·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges a manslaughter conviction, arguing that the court erred in the manslaughter instruction by failing to explain that this offense does not encompass justifiable or excusable homicide. As indicated in Rojas v. State, 552 So.2d 914 (Fla.1989), manslaughter is a residual offense which requires such an explanation for a proper definition of the crime. See also, e.g., [1254]*1254State v. Lucas, 645 So.2d 425 (Fla.1994). Furthermore, the failure to refer to justifiable and excusable homicide in connection with the manslaughter instruction is fundamental error. E.g. Lucas; Rojas. The appealed order is therefore reversed and the case is remanded.

ALLEN, C.J., WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

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

McCray v. State, 846 So. 2d 1253, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 8720, 2003 WL 21338612 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

846 So. 2d 1253 (McCray v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Beckham v. State
884 So. 2d 969 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)