TOMMIE R. WARD, 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.
Tommie Ward appeals his convictions for attempted second-degree murder and armed robbery, challenging the jury instruction on attempted second-degree murder. The court agrees the instruction was defective because it improperly incorporated elements of attempted felony murder, and reverses his conviction for a new trial.
The instruction was defective and constitutes fundamental error affecting the jury's verdict. Ward should have been instructed on attempted first-degree felony murder and the necessarily lesser included offenses of attempted second-degree murder and attempted manslaughter, not on attempted second-degree felony murder, which requires that the killing be done by a non-principal.
[1] A jury instruction that improperly incorporates elements of attempted felony murder into the definition of attempted second-degree murder is defective.
[2] The offense of attempted felony murder is no longer recognized in Florida.
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 jury instruction given on attempted second-degree murder was defective...which combined the elements of attempt and second-degree murder, but which also informed the jury that the defendant could be found guilty of attempted second-degree murder if he did some act toward committing the crime of robbery that went beyond just thinking or talking about it and he would have committed the crime of robbery except that he failed.”
Identifies the specific defect in the jury instruction that improperly incorporated attempted felony murder elements into the attempted second-degree 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 intelligenceWard was charged in connection with an armed robbery allegedly perpetrated with a co-felon. During the robbery, a gun discharged when the gunman attem…
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 Attempted Manslaughter cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, Judge.
Tommie R. Ward [“Ward”] appeals his convictions for attempted second-degree murder and armed robbery with a firearm. The only issue raised on appeal having merit is the contention that the jury instruction given on attempted second-degree murder was defective. We agree that it was defective and reverse his conviction.
This case arises out of an armed robbery allegedly perpetrated by Ward and a co-felon, one of whom acted as a gunman and one of whom drove the getaway vehicle. The attempted murder charges were based on evidence that the gun discharged during the robbery, when the gunman attempted to strike the victim in the head with the gun. These actions resulted in Ward being charged by information with attempted first-degree felony murder.1
Ward was convicted of attempted second-degree murder based on an instruction which combined the elements of attempt and second-degree murder, but which also informed the jury that the defendant could be found guilty of attempted second-degree murder if he did some act toward committing the crime of robbery that went beyond just thinking or talking about it and he would have committed the crime of robbery except that he failed. The latter segment of the instruction appears to have been designed to define the lesser offense of attempted second-degree felony murder. Because Ward was acting, if at all, as a principal in the offense, it would have been error under the law as it existed when this case was tried to instruct the jury on the offense of attempted second-degree felony murder, which requires that the killing be done by a non-principal. See State v. Dene, 533 So. 2d 265 (Fla.1988). Instead, based on the charging document, the jury should have been charged on attempted first-degree felony murder and the necessarily lesser included offenses of attempted second-degree murder and attempted manslaughter, to the extent those instructions were requested. Scurry v. State, 521 So. 2d 1077 (Fla.1988); Hayes v. State, 564 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).2
Since Ward’s conviction, the Florida Supreme Court has receded from Amlotte v. State, 456 So. 2d 448 (Fla.1984), in which it first recognized the offense of attempted felony murder. State v. Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla.1995). In Gray, the court agreed with the dissent in Amlotte that the offense was a logical impossibility and held that the offense will no longer be recognized in Florida. The court further directed that its opinion was to be applied to all cases pending on direct review or not yet final.
Had Ward been convicted of attempted felony murder, based on Gray we would vacate that conviction. Here, however, Ward was convicted of attempted second-degree murder, based on instructions which improperly incorporated elements of attempted felo ny murder and which thereby misstated the elements of attempted second-degree murder.3 Given that there is a reasonable probability that the court’s instructions affected the jury’s verdict, we reverse for a new trial. See Willis v. State, 583 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
The state contends that the error has not been preserved for review because of defense counsel’s failure to object to this instruction below. However, the giving of an incomplete and inaccurate instruction on the law is fundamental error where the error relates to the elements of the criminal offense. See State v. Delva, 575 So. 2d 643 (Fla.1991); Brumbley v. State, 453 So. 2d 381 (Fla.1984); Jones v. State, 656 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Johnson v. State, 632 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . The court specifically referred in the instruction to “felony murder in the second degree.”
. Ward asked for instructions on attempted first-degree felony murder and attempted second-degree murder. . For the proper instructions to be given in cases of attempted second-degree murder, see the Standard. Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 636 So. 2d 502, 502-503 (Fla.1994).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Mungin v. State, 689 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 1995)….2d 774 (1992); see also Lamb v. State, 668 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Humphries v. State, 676 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Thompson v. State, 667 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Tape v. State, 661 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Ward v. State, 655 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). Id. at 492 (emphasis added). We should pay attention to the well-reasoned opinions of our appellate colleagues. Perhaps the real solution to the uncertainty and potential injustice created by the “two issue” rule at issue here…
-
Reed v. State, 783 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…666 So. 2d 995, 998 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (“The trial court’s giving of an incomplete and inaccurate instruction on the law during a jury instruction constitutes fundamental error where the error relates to an element of the offense.”); Ward v. State, 655 So. 2d 1290, 1292 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (“The giving of an incomplete and inaccurate instruction on the law is fundamental error where the error relates to the elements of the criminal offense.”); Gill v. State, 586 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (holding that gi…
-
Jones v. State, 666 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…not given. Although there was no objection, the trial court’s giving of an incomplete and inaccurate instruction on the law during a jury instruction constitutes fundamental error where the error relates to an element of the offense. Ward v. State, 655 So. 2d 1290, 1292 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). Therefore, we reverse and remand for a new trial on the charge of leaving the scene of an accident with injuries. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED for a new trial. COBB and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . § 784.0…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (12 total)
- State v. Collin Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1995)
- D'Angelo v. State, 575 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1991)
- State v. Batraville Vincent Delva, 575 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1991)
- Amlotte v. State, 456 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 1984)
- Jones v. State, 656 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIM. CASES (93-1), 636 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 1994)
- Brumbley v. State, 453 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 1984)
- State v. Dene, 533 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 1988)
- Hayes v. State, 564 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Johnson v. State, 632 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)