Poole v. State

674 So. 2d 746, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 480, 1996 WL 26958
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 24, 1996·No. No. 94-2731·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case fits squarely within our holding in Jones v. State, 656 So.2d 489 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), which controls the outcome here. In Jones, as here, the trial court gave extemporaneous instructions to the jury that denigrate the reasonable doubt standard. We held in Jones that it was fundamental error to instruct a jury that it could convict on a lesser standard of proof. Accordingly, as we did in Jones, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

POLEN, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

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

Poole v. State, 674 So. 2d 746, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 480, 1996 WL 26958 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

674 So. 2d 746 (Poole v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Poole
686 So. 2d 572 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)
Doctor v. State
677 So. 2d 1372 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Pierce v. State
671 So. 2d 186 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)