Standard Jury Instructions-Criminal Cases

603 So. 2d 1175, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 400, 1992 Fla. LEXIS 1220, 1992 WL 148230
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJuly 2, 1992
Docket79320
StatusPublished
Cited by79 cases

This text of 603 So. 2d 1175 (Standard Jury Instructions-Criminal Cases) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Standard Jury Instructions-Criminal Cases, 603 So. 2d 1175, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 400, 1992 Fla. LEXIS 1220, 1992 WL 148230 (Fla. 1992).

Opinion

603 So.2d 1175 (1992)

STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS — CRIMINAL CASES NO. 92-1.

No. 79320.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 2, 1992.

Harry Lee Coe III, Chair, Committee on Standard Jury Instructions (Criminal), Tampa, for petitioner.

PER CURIAM.

The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions (Criminal) has submitted recommended amendments to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases. The explanatory portion of the report is quoted below:

REPORT (NO. 92-1) OF THE COMMITTEE ON STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS (CRIMINAL)
TO THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA:
Your Committee on Standard Jury Instructions (Criminal) recommends that The Florida Bar be authorized to publish amendments to FLORIDA STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES. The proposed additional instructions and revised instructions are attached.
After the title of each instruction, a parenthetical description of the proposal is given. The proposal is described as "(Amended)," "(Revised)," or "(New)." "Amended" means that the wording is not substantially revised; the added words are underlined and the deleted words have strike-overs. "Revised" means that the language has changed substantially and that no attempt is made to show the changes with underlines and strike-overs. "New" means that the instruction is based on a statute for which no current instruction exists. Short explanations also follow each proposal.
Some of the proposed instructions were published on April 15, 1989. Those proposals along with many new proposals were published in the February 15, 1991, Bar News.
No responses were received to the first publication. Two letters in response to the second publication were received. The committee has considered the responses and has amended its proposals to conform substantially to the suggestions made.
A few of the committee's suggested changes have not been published in the Bar News. To allow all interested parties a final opportunity to review the proposals, the committee is asking The Florida Bar to publish a notice that amendments have been filed, that a copy of this report can be obtained at cost for review, and that comments should be submitted by March 15, 1992, to the court.
A copy of this report also is being sent to the presidents or chairs of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, the Florida Public Defenders Association, the jury instructions subcommittee of the Criminal Law Section of The Florida Bar, and the Conference of Circuit Court Judges.

One of the committee's recommendations pertained to the instruction on excusable homicide. The so-called short-form instruction on this subject is found in the introduction to homicide on pages 61 and 62 of the manual, and the so-called long form is found on page 76 of the manual. The current instructions provide that the short *1176 form shall be read in all murder and manslaughter cases, and that the long form shall also be read whenever excusable homicide is an issue in the case. The committee concludes that the long form as last amended in State v. Smith, 573 So.2d 306 (Fla. 1990), is incorrect because it requires under all three of the alternative circumstances that the killing be committed by accident and misfortune. The committee believes that a killing upon sudden combat without any dangerous weapon being used and not done in a cruel and unusual manner need not have occurred by accident and misfortune and has recommended an instruction to this effect. The committee suggests that its recommended instruction replace both the current short- and long-form instructions and that the new instruction not be given where there is no basis for it in the evidence. We respectfully disagree with the committee's recommendation on this subject.

Section 782.03, Florida Statutes (1991), reads as follows:

782.03 Excusable homicide. — Homicide is excusable when committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent, or by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or upon a sudden combat, without any dangerous weapon being used and not done in a cruel or unusual manner.

We believe the most logical interpretation of this language is as follows:

Homicide is excusable when committed (1) by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent, or (2) by accident and misfortune
(a) in the heat of passion upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
(b) upon a sudden combat without any dangerous weapon being used and not done in a cruel and unusual manner.

Thus, a killing which results from sudden combat must have been committed by accident and misfortune. This view is supported by logic as well as the language of the statute. We do not believe the legislature would have intended to always excuse a homicide that occurred during sudden combat so long as a dangerous weapon was not used and it was not done in a cruel or unusual manner. If this were so, anyone who became involved in a fight and later purposefully killed his opponent would be excused if he did not use a dangerous weapon and did not do the killing in a cruel and unusual manner. We interpret the sudden combat exception to protect a person who becomes involved in a fight which accidentally leads to the death of the other party.

Furthermore, we do not concur with the committee's suggestion that no portion of the excusable homicide instruction need be read when it has no basis in the evidence. We say this because Florida case law has consistently held that manslaughter is a residual offense which cannot be properly defined without an explanation that justifiable homicide and excusable homicide are excluded from the crime. Rojas v. State, 552 So.2d 914 (Fla. 1989); Hedges v. State, 172 So.2d 824 (Fla. 1965). Because a manslaughter instruction will have to be given in every homicide case, the instruction on excusable homicide will also have to be included. We do, however, concur with the committee's suggestion that only one instruction on excusable homicide need be given rather than both the current short and long forms.

Therefore, we hold that the following instruction on excusable homicide shall be given in every homicide case in place of the short form now found on pages 61 and 62 of the manual.

EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE
The killing of a human being is excusable and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:
1. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with *1177 usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or
2. When the killing occurs by accident or misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
3. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
"Dangerous weapon" is any weapon that, taking into account the manner in which it is used, is likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

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

Related

In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2018-12.
272 So. 3d 243 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2019)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2018-14.
267 So. 3d 980 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2019)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2018-09.
262 So. 3d 59 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2019)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2018-08.
259 So. 3d 754 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2018)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2018-05.
257 So. 3d 925 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2018)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2018-04.
257 So. 3d 370 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2018)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2018-02.
256 So. 3d 1316 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2018)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2017-06.
236 So. 3d 282 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2018)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Report 2016-09
216 So. 3d 497 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2017)
In Re: Standard Criminal Jury Instructions in Capital Cases
214 So. 3d 1236 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2017)
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—report 2016-01
213 So. 3d 680 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2017)
In Re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES-REPORT NO. 2015-06
195 So. 3d 356 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
603 So. 2d 1175, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 400, 1992 Fla. LEXIS 1220, 1992 WL 148230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/standard-jury-instructions-criminal-cases-fla-1992.