Quarterman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Quarterman v. State

971 So. 2d 991, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 54, 2008 WL 45527

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 4, 2008

DocketNo. 5D07-223

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 971 So. 2d 991 (Quarterman 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

Quarterman v. State, 971 So. 2d 991, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 54, 2008 WL 45527 (Fla. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Willie Lee Quarterman [“Defendant”] timely appeals his conviction for manslaughter. We affirm.

There is no merit to any of the issues raised on appeal. The refusal to instruct the jury on self defense was not error. Even if there were enough evidence from which a jury could conclude that Defendant reasonably believed that his victim intended him death or great bodily harm, no evidence was presented to show that Defendant made any attempt to retreat or that he made any effort to escape the perceived danger. Thomas v. State, 918 So.2d 327, 330 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Nor did the trial court err in excluding evidence of victim’s drug abuse, because Defendant did not show that it was relevant to any issue in the case or necessary to rebut any misleading evidence in the State’s case.

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, THOMPSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Willie Lee Quarterman [“Defendant”] timely appeals his conviction for manslaughter. We affirm.

There is no merit to any of the issues raised on appeal. The refusal to instruct the jury on self defense was not error. Even if there were enough evidence from which a jury could conclude that Defendant reasonably believed that his victim intended him death or great bodily harm, no evidence was presented to show that Defendant made any attempt to retreat or that he made any effort to escape the perceived danger. Thomas v. State, 918 So.2d 327, 330 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Nor did the trial court err in excluding evidence of victim’s drug abuse, because Defendant did not show that it was relevant to any issue in the case or necessary to rebut any misleading evidence in the State’s case.

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, THOMPSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

971 So. 2d 991, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 54, 2008 WL 45527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/quarterman-v-state-fladistctapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack