TODD MARCUS WILLIAMS, 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.
A trial court's failure to instruct the jury on simple battery, a necessarily lesser included offense of battery of a law enforcement officer, requires reversal.
The defendant was convicted of battery of a law enforcement officer. The trial court refused to instruct the jury on simple battery, a lesser included…
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 Jury Pardon Power cases and more on FLexlaw
ZEHMER, Judge.
Todd Marcus Williams appeals a judgment and sentence adjudicating him guilty of two counts of battery of a law enforcement officer and sentencing him as a habitual felony offender to 4V2 years’ incarceration. Because the trial court failed to instruct the jury on simple battery, we reverse.
The trial court refused to give the requested instruction on simple battery because Williams had not presented any evidence that the persons he allegedly battered were not law enforcement officers. In State v. Wimberly, 498 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 1986), the supreme court held that simple battery is a necessarily lesser included offense of battery of a law enforcement officer, and that even where the evidence is undisputed that the alleged victim is a law enforcement officer, the simple battery instruction must be given so as not to deprive the jury of its pardon power. See also Ferrell v. State, 544 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Wyche v. State, 573 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Crapps v. State, 566 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).
The state concedes that Wimberly and its progeny control this case, but requests that the court certify to the supreme court the question of whether a failure to instruct on a necessarily lesser included offense may be deemed harmless where the element unique to the greater offense is not in dispute. We see no need to certify such a question. A trial court’s failure to instruct on the necessarily lesser included offense of simple battery would amount to a directed verdict for the state on an essential element of the charged offense, that the victim was a law enforcement officer. Clearly, this is prohibited. Wimberly clearly answers the question posed in the negative.
Because we must reverse the judgment of conviction and remand for a new trial, we do not consider whether the court erred in sentencing Williams as a habitual felony offender. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
BARFIELD and MINER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Benton v. State, 650 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…nt officer. We conclude that, although the simple battery instruction must also be given even where the evidence is undisputed that the alleged victim is a law enforcement officer, State v. Wimberly, 498 So. 2d 929 (Fla.1986), and Williams v. State, 611 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), the appellant’s failure below to object to the jury instructions or to request an instruction on simple battery precludes appellant from raising this issue on appeal. Daniels v. State, 587 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1991), Roman v. State,…
-
King v. State, 911 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…v. State, 714 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). “[E]ven where the evidence is undisputed that the victim is a law enforcement officer, the simple battery instruction must be given so as not to deprive the jury of its pardon power.” Williams v. State, 611 So. 2d 94, 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Here, the trial court denied King’s request on grounds that there was no controversy as to whether the victim was a law [*858] enforcement officer. Because the trial court was required to give the instruction, King’s convi…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Wimberly, 498 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 1986)
- Renetha C. Wyche v. State, 573 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Ferrell v. State, 544 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Crapps v. State, 566 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)