State v. Matute-Chirinos

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Matute-Chirinos

732 So. 2d 349, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14662, 1998 WL 821883

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 18, 1998

DocketNo. 97-2870

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 732 So. 2d 349 (State v. Matute-Chirinos) 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

State v. Matute-Chirinos, 732 So. 2d 349, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14662, 1998 WL 821883 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The state seeks certiorari review of an order finding the record evidence to be insufficient to warrant jury instructions on the aggravating circumstance of section 921.141(h), Florida Statutes (1997), that the capital felony was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel and section 921.141(d), Florida Statutes (1997), that the capital felony was committed while the respondent was engaged in the commission of, or an attempt to commit a kidnapping. We have jurisdiction to entertain this petition. See State v. Matute-Chirinos, 713 So.2d 1006 (Fla.1998).

We conclude that the trial court did not depart from the essential requirements of the law when it determined, as a matter- of law, that the evidence presented in this case did not support a finding that the homicide was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel, see Donaldson v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S245, 722 So.2d 177 (Fla. 1998); Buckner v. State, 714 So.2d 384 (Fla.1998); Richardson v. State, 604 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 1992); Cheshire v. State, 568 So.2d 908 (Fla.1990); Hardwick v. State, 521 So.2d 1071 (Fla.1988), or that the homicide was committed while the respondent was engaged in the commission of or attempted commission of a kidnapping, see Faison v. State, 426 So.2d 963, 965-66 (Fla.1983); see also Berry v. State, 668 So.2d 967, 969 (Fla.1996). The petition is therefore denied.

Petition denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

The state seeks certiorari review of an order finding the record evidence to be insufficient to warrant jury instructions on the aggravating circumstance of section 921.141(h), Florida Statutes (1997), that the capital felony was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel and section 921.141(d), Florida Statutes (1997), that the capital felony was committed while the respondent was engaged in the commission of, or an attempt to commit a kidnapping. We have jurisdiction to entertain this petition. See State v. Matute-Chirinos, 713 So.2d 1006 (Fla.1998).

We conclude that the trial court did not depart from the essential requirements of the law when it determined, as a matter- of law, that the evidence presented in this case did not support a finding that the homicide was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel, see Donaldson v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S245, 722 So.2d 177 (Fla. 1998); Buckner v. State, 714 So.2d 384 (Fla.1998); Richardson v. State, 604 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 1992); Cheshire v. State, 568 So.2d 908 (Fla.1990); Hardwick v. State, 521 So.2d 1071 (Fla.1988), or that the homicide was committed while the respondent was engaged in the commission of or attempted commission of a kidnapping, see Faison v. State, 426 So.2d 963, 965-66 (Fla.1983); see also Berry v. State, 668 So.2d 967, 969 (Fla.1996). The petition is therefore denied.

Petition denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

732 So. 2d 349, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14662, 1998 WL 821883, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-matute-chirinos-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack