HANK H. BERRY, 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.
Voluntary intoxication is a valid defense to aggravated battery, and the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on this defense when evidence supported it.
Appellant was charged with aggravated battery. Evidence showed appellant consumed a significant amount of alcohol before the altercation, and witnesse…
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 Defense cases and more on FLexlaw
FARMER, Judge.
Appellant was charged with aggravated battery. The victim of the battery testified that appellant was drunk, the arresting officer testified that appellant was drunk (under the influence), and appellant himself testified that he had had at least six beers and some wine before the altercation. Nevertheless the trial court refused to give a requested jury instruction of voluntary intoxication as a defense to the charge of aggravated battery.
We reverse for a new trial. It is settled that voluntary intoxication is a valid defense to the specific intent crime of aggravated battery. Cirack v. State, 201 So. 2d 706 (Fla.1967); and State v. Horvatch, 413 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). It is thus reversible error for the trial court not to instruct the jury on the effects of voluntary intoxication when there is, as here, evidence in the record tending to prove such intoxication. Linehan v. State, 476 So. 2d 1262 (Fla.1985).
We think that the amount of alcohol consumed by appellant, as well as the testimony of the victim and arresting officer, together with the recency of the consumption, might reasonably be construed by a jury as proof that appellant was intoxicated. See Gardner v. State, 480 So. 2d 91 (Fla.1985).
REVERSED WITH DIRECTIONS.
GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and STREITFELD, JEFFREY E., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Huber v. State, 669 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…ffects” and (2) the defendant had stated earlier that he did not want any special jury instructions. Voluntary intoxication is a defense to the specific intent crime of aggravated battery. Cirack v. State, 201 So. 2d 706 (Fla.1967); Berry v. State, 586 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). It is the duty of the trial court to give instructions covering the defendant’s theory of the case if there is competent, substantial evidence to support it. Cronin v. State, 470 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Furthermore, ther…
-
Soloman v. State, 741 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…intoxication defense would have been unavailing against the general intent crime charged,2 evidence of Defendant’s intoxication would have supported a voluntary intoxication instruction limited to the aggravated battery instruction. Berry v. State, 586 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (voluntary intoxication is a defense to the specific intent crime of aggravated battery). A hearing is necessary to determine whether there was evidence of Defendant’s intoxication at the time he committed the crime, whether he i…
-
McINNIS v. State, 642 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…t to the exclusion of self defense. Because the trial court failed to instruct the jury on self defense, we reverse. Mclnnis also contends the trial court erred by not giving the jury a voluntary intoxication instruction. Unlike in Berry v. State, 586 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), no one testified that Mclnnis was intoxicated. Absent such testimony, the trial court correctly denied the requested instruction. See Linehan v. State, 476 So. 2d 1262 (Fla.1985). [*833] Accordingly, we reverse Mclnnis’ convicti…
Authorities Cited
- Linehan v. State, 476 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 1985)
- Gardner v. State, 480 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 1985)
- Cirack v. State, 201 So. 2d 706 (Fla. 1967)
- State v. Horvatch, 413 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)