MARK ROSSI, 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.
Rossi was charged with second-degree murder but convicted of manslaughter after a barroom brawl. The appellate court reversed because the trial court improperly refused to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses of aggravated battery and battery, despite evidence that another person may have caused the victim's death.
A defendant charged with homicide is entitled to jury instructions on non-homicide lesser included offenses when there is evidence creating a factual question about whether the defendant's act caused the death, as distinguished from cases where death clearly resulted from the defendant's actions.
[1] A defendant charged with murder is entitled to jury instructions on non-homicide lesser included offenses when there is evidence that the victim's death may have been cau…
[2] When conflicting evidence exists regarding the cause of a victim's death in a homicide prosecution, a jury may be instructed on lesser included offenses that are not homi…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“In Drotar, a defendant charged with second degree murder was convicted of aggravated battery... Martin cannot be interpreted as restricting jury instructions in every case where death ensues. Drotar distinguishes those cases where there is an issue for the trier of fact as to whether the death was caused by defendant's act or some other cause.”
Establishes the critical distinction that lesser included offense instructions are required when causation is disputed
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA victim died following a chaotic brawl involving multiple persons outside a Lake Worth bar. Evidence suggested the defendant may have caused the deat…
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 Homicide Jury Instructions cases and more on FLexlaw
ALDERMAN, JAMES E., Senior Justice.
The appellant Rossi, the defendant in this criminal case, was charged with second degree murder and convicted of manslaughter. We reverse because of the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses of aggravated battery and battery.
The death of the victim resulted from a brawl involving several persons outside a Lake Worth bar. There was evidence that the defendant may have caused the death of the victim. However, there was also evidence that the victim sustained injuries from at least one other blow during the course of this chaotic and confusing fight. Thus, the jury could have concluded that the victim did not die from the defendant’s blow.
The Florida Supreme Court in Martin v. State, 342 So. 2d 501 (Fla.1977), said that jury instructions in a homicide case are restricted to the degrees of murder, manslaughter, and justifiable and excusable homicide and held that the trial court did not err by refusing to instruct the jury on aggravated assault.
However, we believe that Drotar v. State, 433 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 443 So. 2d 979 (Fla.1984), more appropriately governs the present case. In Drotar, a defendant charged with second degree murder was convicted of aggravated battery. On appeal he contended that the trial court erred in giving, over his objection, jury instructions on aggravated battery. The appellate court, in affirming the aggravated battery conviction, said that Martin cannot be interpreted as restricting jury instructions in every case where death ensues. Drotar distinguishes those cases where there is an issue for the trier of fact as to whether the death was caused by defendant’s act or some other cause. In such cases the defendant is entitled to non-homicide lesser included offense instructions.1
In the instant case, there was evidence of a great amount of confusion during the brawl from which the jury could have concluded that defendant did not cause the victim’s death. Thus, consistent with Dro-tar, defendant was entitled to instructions on aggravated battery and battery.
REVERSE AND REMAND FOR A NEW TRIAL.
ANSTEAD and GUNTHER, JJ., concur. . This distinction was recognized in In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 543 So. 2d 1205, 1233 (Fla.1989), wherein the court noted in a footnote the distinction made by the court in Drotar.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barfield v. State, 762 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…ted from the original plan. Parker v. State, 458 So. 2d 750, 752 (Fla.1984). See also Bryant v. State, 412 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1982); Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Teal v. State, 658 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Rossi v. State, 602 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Rodriguez v. State, 571 So. 2d 1356 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The trial judge agreed at the charge conference that -the Independent Act defense appeared to “fit,” and both the judge and prosecutor agreed there was evidence to support…
-
Humphrey v. State, 690 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…case showed that the cause of death may have been the earlier injury, not the later injury, the Fourth District held that the defendant was entitled to a jury instruction on non-homicide lesser included offenses. Defendant relies on Rossi v. State, 602 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), but that case is also factually distinguishable. In Rossi, the “death of the victim resulted from a brawl involving several persons outside a Lake Worth bar.” Id. at 614.- The incident was described as a “chaotic and confusing f…
-
Walker v. State, 671 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…PER CURIAM. We reverse and remand for a new trial on the authority of Rossi v. State, 602 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). In Rossi, this court held that- where there is evidence that a victim’s death may have resulted from a [*818] cause independent of the defendant s criminal act, that defendant is entitled to jury instructions on non-homicide les…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 543 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 1989)
- Martin v. State, 342 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1977)
- Drotar v. State, 433 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)