DEBRA TEAGUE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Debra Teague was convicted of manslaughter (a lesser included offense of second-degree murder) after shooting Sam Hill in her motel room. She appeals, contesting the sufficiency of evidence and the admissibility of testimony regarding her engagement in prostitution.
The conviction is affirmed. Sufficient evidence contradicted appellant's self-defense claim, supporting the jury's verdict. The court also found no harmful error in admitting testimony about prostitution because appellant had already testified without objection that the victim had paid her money for her company.
[1] A motion for a directed verdict of acquittal should be granted where no legally sufficient evidence has been submitted on which a jury could legally find a verdict of gui…
[2] A defendant moving for a directed verdict of acquittal admits all facts in evidence and every conclusion favorable to the State fairly and reasonably inferable therefrom.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“To justify a homicide on the grounds of self-defense, the situation must be such as to induce a reasonably prudent person to believe that danger was imminent and that there was a real necessity for the taking of a life.”
States the legal standard for self-defense justification in homicide cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTeague, a motel resident, was surprised by victim Sam Hill, who forced his way into her room early in the morning. After argument, violence, and repea…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Imminent Danger cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., Judge.
Appellant Debra Teague, charged with second degree murder, was convicted of the lesser included offense of manslaughter. She appeals her judgment and sentence.
Two points have been raised on appeal: 1) whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict, and 2) whether it was improper for the state attorney over the objection of the defense to elicit from the defendant that she was engaged in prostitution in the hours prior to the shooting.
We find no harmful error and affirm.
While entering her room in the early hours of the morning, appellant, a resident of a motel, was surprised by the victim, Sam Hill, who forced his way into the room.
After a considerable period of argument, appellant left the room to call a cab for Sam and then returned. The cab driver said he left whep he saw her with a gun. Appellant claims Sam was beating her and to get him to stop she fired a shot into the mirror. Finally, after more argument and repeated violence, she shot and killed Sam.
Appellant contends that her claim of self-defense or justification stands uncon-tradicted and thus, as a matter of law, the conviction must be overturned. However, there is evidence in the record to contradict her version. The state introduced evidence to show that her injuries were not substantial. The bruises or swellings, limited to a cut on the lower surface of her lip, required no medical attention. She was able to leave the room and call a cab but she did not call for help nor did she call the police. She claims that she got the pistol after the cab driver left; the cab driver said he saw her with it behind her back. This evidence contradicts appellant’s testimony that she was repeatedly assaulted and feared for her life.
A defendant who relies on self-defense has the burden of producing or going forward with the evidence. Robbins v. State, 312 So. 2d 243 (Fla.2d DCA 1975); Bolin v. State, 297 So. 2d 317 (Fla.3d DCA 1974). To justify a homicide on the grounds of self-defense, the situation must be such as to induce a reasonably prudent person to believe that danger was imminent and that there was a real necessity for the taking of a life. Darty v. State, 161 So. 2d 864 (Fla.2d DCA 1964). Even though the defendant is the only eyewitness to the shooting, the jury is not required to accept her testimony as the absolute truth; a defendant’s testimony can be accepted or rejected in whole or in part depending on the evaluation by the jury of its credibility in light of the attending circumstances established by other evidence. Id at 872. It is the duty of the jury to weigh conflicting evidence adduced at trial; the appellate court should not overrule the jury if there is competent, substantial evidence to support the verdict. Shiver v. State, 327 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).
As to the second point, appellant contends that the court should not have permitted the state to inquire into her being a prostitute over her objection. We do not think this was harmful error because appellant had earlier testified without objection that the first time she had met Sam he paid her $30.00 for her company for a part of the evening.
AFFIRMED.
COBB and SHARP, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Dunn v. State, 454 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…1 (Fla.1982), cert. den., — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 1883, 76 L.Ed.2d 812 (1983); Tibbs v. State, 397 So. 2d 1120 (Fla.1981), aff'd, 457 U.S. 31, 102 S.Ct. 2211, 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982);3 State v. Stewart, 404 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Teague v. State, 390 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Bouler v. State, 389 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Knight v. State, 392 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), review denied, 399 So. 2d 1143 (Fla.1981); Lowery v. State, 450 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). The difference between th…
-
Gonzalez v. State, 399 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…o. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Garmise v. State, 311 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Codie v. State, 313 So. 2d 754 (Fla.1975); Bristow v. State, 338 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Atkinson v. State, 378 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Teague v. State, 390 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 5th DCA 1976); Bassett v. State, 392 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Knight v. State, 394 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.390(d).…
-
Knight v. State, 392 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal. The state presented a prima facie case of second degree murder against appellant, thereby shifting to him the burden to come forward with evidence bearing on his claim of self-defense. Teague v. State, 390 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Bolin v. State, 297 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied 304 So. 2d 452 (Fla.1974). In this regard, appellant failed to meet his burden: the only evidence of self-defense put forth by appellant was his own testimony that he wa…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Darty v. State, 161 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Bolin v. State, 297 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- C. G. R. Med. Corp. v. Share, 312 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Shiver v. State, 327 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)