WILLIE A. STROBRIDGE, 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.
The court reversed a manslaughter conviction because the trial court gave a misleading jury instruction on excusable homicide and assessed costs without notice or hearing.
The standard jury instruction on excusable homicide is misleading as written and requires reversal, and assessment of costs without notice and hearing is reversible error.
[1] The standard jury instruction on excusable homicide, as written, is misleading and requires reversal when given without modification.
[2] Assessment of costs against a defendant without notice and a hearing constitutes reversible error.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceStrobridge was convicted of manslaughter with a firearm and sentenced to twenty-seven years' imprisonment. The trial court gave the standard jury inst…
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 Excusable Homicide Jury Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of a judgment of conviction and sentence of twenty-seven years’ imprisonment for the offense of manslaughter with a firearm. He contends that the trial court erred in 1) denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, 2) instructing the jury on excusable homicide, and 3) assessing costs against him without notice or a hearing.
We find no error demonstrated in Point I, but reverse the judgment of conviction based on Point II and the assessment of costs based on Point III.
The trial court gave the standard jury instruction on excusable homicide, including the introductory short form, which contains the concluding phrase, “or upon a sudden combat, without any dangerous weapon being used and not done in a cruel or unusual manner.” Based upon the facts of this case and a number of recent cases concluding with Hoffert v. State, 559 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), the appellate courts have been uniform in holding that the giving of the standard jury instruction without more is misleading as written and requires a new trial. Furthermore, the assessment of costs without notice and a hearing is also reversible error. Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984).
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and sentence are reversed and the cause is remanded for a new trial.
HERSEY, C.J.,.DOWNEY, J., and FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)
- Hoffert v. State, 559 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)