ANDRES GARCIA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Garcia was convicted of felony murder in the third degree based on underlying cocaine sale charges. The appellate court reversed the murder conviction, finding insufficient evidence of a causal connection between the underlying felony and the homicide, but affirmed conviction on the lesser included offense of attempted sale of cocaine.
The circumstantial evidence was insufficient to prove a causal connection between the cocaine felony and the homicide, as it did not exclude the reasonable hypothesis that the killing was independent of the underlying felony. However, the evidence supported conviction for the lesser included offense of attempted sale of cocaine. The prosecutor's closing argument did not improperly comment on the defendant's silence.
[1] Circumstantial evidence is insufficient to support a felony murder conviction when it does not exclude the reasonable hypothesis that the homicide was an act independent…
[2] Evidence supporting an underlying felony may be sufficient to convict a defendant of an attempt to commit that felony, even if the evidence does not support a felony murd…
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“the circumstantial evidence did not exclude the reasonable hypothesis that the homicide was an act independent from the underlying felony”
Establishes the standard for felony murder convictions and why the evidence was insufficient for the murder charge
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGarcia was approached by two men seeking to purchase cocaine. He contacted Onel Rodriguez to arrange a supply and accompanied the men to Rodriguez's a…
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 Comment On Defendant'S Silence cases and more on FLexlaw
[*329] NESBITT, Judge.
Garcia was charged and convicted of felony murder in the third degree. The underlying felonies charged were possession or attempted possession with intent to sell cocaine and/or the sale of cocaine. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction.
The testimony adduced at trial indicated that the defendant was approached by two men to arrange a purchase of cocaine. The defendant contacted Onel Rodriguez to inquire if he could supply the drugs and arranged to bring the two men to Onel’s apartment later in the day. At the agreed time, Garcia accompanied the men to Onel’s residence, but remained outside. No testimony was offered as to what transpired inside Onel’s bedroom. A witness stated that she saw the men enter Onel’s room; she heard loud noises and saw the two men-flee from the apartment, one brandishing a revolver. Onel and another man remained in the room. Police responded to a call regarding gunfire in the area and discovered the body of the victim later identified as Campos. In the meantime, Onel fled from the apartment.
On this evidence, we agree with the defense that the circumstantial evidence did not exclude the reasonable hypothesis that the homicide was an act independent from the underlying felony. See Bryant v. State, 412 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1982); Mahaun v. State, 377 So. 2d 1158 (Fla.1979); Adams v. State, 341 So. 2d 765 (Fla.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 878, 98 S.Ct. 232, 54 L.Ed.2d 158 (1977).1 Nonetheless, the evidence does support a conviction for the lesser included offense of attempted sale of cocaine.
Because of this disposition, it is necessary for us to consider the appellant’s second issue on appeal which pertains to an allegedly improper comment on the defendant’s silence. The prosecutor’s statement during closing argument was: “Also, think back about the presentation of the defense and I think you will have some doubts.” The defense promptly objected and moved for a mistrial claiming that since the defense did not present a case, the comment was susceptible to being interpreted as a reference to the defendant’s silence. The trial court denied the motion and we are in accord with that ruling.
While it is true that the defendant neither testified himself, nor put on any witnesses, a possible defense was explored during the cross-examination of the medical examiner. Defense counsel, at that time, asked questions which related to the possibility that the victim had committed suicide. As such, the state could properly ask the jury to think back to the defense-proffered evidence of suicide. This statement falls within the permissible range of comment on the nature of the evidence as it existed before the jury. White v. State, 377 So. 2d 1149 (Fla.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 845, 101 S.Ct. 129, 66 L.Ed.2d 54 (1980); State v. Jones, 204 So. 2d 515 (Fla.1967).
For the foregoing reasons, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand to the trial court with directions to adjudicate the defendant guilty of attempted sale of cocaine.
JORGENSON, J., concurs in result only.
. The defendant makes the further argument that liability for third degree murder may only be imposed where the homicide is committed by a co-felon and that there is no evidence on this issue. Because we have determined that the requisite causal connection between the felony and the homicide has not been proven, we need not decide these issues and specifically decline to do so.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gomez v. State, 496 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…omplice, or why. It therefore follows that a judgment of acquittal on the second-degree murder charge was mandated in this case. See Bryant v. State, 412 So. 2d 347, 350 (Fla.1982); Mahaun v. State, 377 So. 2d 1158, 1160 (Fla.1979); Garcia v. State, 439 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Mumford v. State, 19 Md.App. 640, 313 A. 2d 563, 566 (1974); W.L. Clark & W.L. Marshall, Law of Crimes § 401, at 209 (7th ed. 1967). Second, the next point on appeal raised by the defendant Gomez becomes moot in view of our rul…
-
Howard v. State, 545 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…een committed in furtherance of the common criminal scheme, or as a probable, predictable, reasonably foreseeable, or causally connected result of the underlying felony. See State v. Amaro, 436 So. 2d 1056, 1061 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983); Garcia v. State, 439 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1983) (the act must not be one independent from the underlying felony). It is entirely foreseeable by those involved in illicit drug transactions that their accomplices may try to secrete or destroy the substance by placing it in the m…
-
Tarpley v. State, 477 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…er to the evidence as it existed before the jury and to point out that there was an absence of evidence on a certain issue, White v. State, 377 So. 2d 1149 (Fla.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 845, 101 S.Ct. 129, 66 L.Ed.2d 54 (1980); Garcia v. State, 439 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Gains v. State, 417 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), rev. denied, 426 So. 2d 26 (Fla.1983). Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- State v. Jones, 204 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1967)
- White v. State, 377 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 1979)
- Adams v. State, 341 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1976)
- Middleton v. South Carolina, 434 U.S. 878 (U.S. 1977)
- Magda v. United States, 434 U.S. 878 (U.S. 1977)
- Mahaun v. State, 377 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 1979)
- Wodford v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)
- Bryant v. State, 412 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 1982)
- THE Florida BAR v. Aronson, 412 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 1982)
- Hudson v. Maryland, 449 U.S. 845 (U.S. 1980)