Sean Barnes v. The State of Florida
This text of Sean Barnes v. The State of Florida (Sean Barnes v. The State of Florida) 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed August 28, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________
No. 3D22-0115 Lower Tribunal No. F13-18171 ________________
Sean Barnes, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Miguel M. de la O, Judge.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Shannon Hemmendinger, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Magaly Rodriguez, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, C.J., and SCALES, and LOBREE, JJ.
LOGUE, C.J.
Sean Barnes appeals his convictions, following a jury trial, for
attempted second-degree murder with a firearm, aggravated battery, and shooting or throwing a deadly missile. He raises a single issue on appeal,
asserting the trial court erred by admitting into evidence a prior uncharged
sexual assault involving the same victim.
We hold the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting this
collateral crimes evidence because it was necessary to establish the entire
context from which the charged crimes arose and to adequately describe the
events leading up to the charged crimes, as well as to explain Barnes’ motive
for shooting the victim. See Dennis v. State, 817 So. 2d 741, 761-62 (Fla.
2002) (holding prior incidents of stalking, threatening, and assault by the
defendant against the victim were relevant to establish defendant’s motive in
prosecution for first-degree murder); Simmons v. State, 790 So. 2d 1177,
1180 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (holding collateral evidence of defendant’s prior
violent acts against victim were relevant and admissible to establish
defendant’s intent to commit charged crimes of aggravated battery and
aggravated assault against victim); Burgal v. State, 740 So. 2d 82, 83 (Fla.
3d DCA 1999) (holding prior incidents of domestic violence by the defendant
against the victim were properly admitted to prove motive, intent, and
premeditation in prosecution for attempted first-degree murder); Brown v.
State, 611 So. 2d 540, 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (holding that evidence that
the defendant had a rocky relationship with the victim and had threatened to
2 kill her if he caught her with another man was relevant to establish motive in
a prosecution for battery and attempted second-degree murder).
Furthermore, the trial court provided a limiting instruction and restricted
the scope of inquiry into the prior act to prevent unfair prejudice. See
Gonzalez v. State, 271 So. 3d 80, 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019). Accordingly, we
affirm the convictions and sentence.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Sean Barnes v. The State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sean-barnes-v-the-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2024.