VINCENT LAMENT MEEKS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Vincent Meeks appealed his conviction for first degree murder and two counts of attempted first degree murder. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the murder conviction but reversed and remanded the attempted murder convictions because the jury verdict form failed to specify whether convictions were based on premeditated or felony murder theories.
The prosecutor's remarks did not require reversal as they were either fair reply to defense arguments or not egregious in context, and any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given overwhelming evidence of guilt. The trial court properly refused armed trespass instruction. The attempted first degree murder convictions must be vacated and the case remanded for retrial on attempted first degree premeditated murder because the verdict form did not specify which legal theory supported the convictions.
[1] Prosecutor's remarks during closing argument are not grounds for reversal if they are in fair reply to defense counsel's argument or not egregious in context.
[2] Errors in overruling objections to prosecutorial comments during closing argument are harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in light of overwhelming evidence of guilt.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Where it is impossible to determine which theory the jury used to convict on a charge of attempted first degree murder, and the facts could support a guilty verdict on either theory, the attempted murder conviction must be vacated and the case returned for retrial on the charge of first degree premeditated murder.”
Establishes the controlling legal standard for reversal when jury verdict form is ambiguous regarding which legal theory supported attempted murder conviction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMeeks was convicted of first degree murder and two counts of attempted first degree murder. The state presented a defendant's confession, testimony fr…
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 Premeditated Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
BARKDULL, Judge.
Vincent Meeks appeals from one first degree murder conviction and two attempted first degree murder convictions.
Meeks first contends that the cumulative effect of several comments made by the prosecutor during closing argument was such that he was denied a fair and impartial trial. We find that the remarks were made either in fair reply to defense counsel’s argument or were not so egregious when taken in context as to require reversal. See Ferguson v. State, 417 So. 2d 639 (Fla.1982); Davis v. State, 590 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), rev. denied, 649 So. 2d 234 (Fla.1994). And in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt presented by the state1, any error committed by the trial court in overruling objections to the comments at issue was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla.1986).
We also find no error in the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury on armed trespass as the lesser included offense of third degree felony murder and attempted third degree felony murder.
First, there was no evidence adduced at trial which would have supported a charge of armed trespass as to the first degree murder charge since it was never contended that Meeks had entered or attempted to enter the car in which the victim was traveling.
The jury was, however, properly instructed on third degree murder with the lesser included felonies of aggravated assault and shooting into an occupied vehicle. See Green v. State, 475 So. 2d 235 (Fla.1985).
Second, there is no longer any offense of attempted felony murder in Florida and so the failure to instruct the jury on this charge cannot be error. The third point on appeal relates to the convictions for attempted first degree murder. Meeks contends that since the jury was instructed on both attempted premeditated murder and attempted felony murder and because the jury verdict form did not specify whether the guilty verdicts were based upon premeditated or felony murder, then both convictions must be vacated and the case returned for retrial on attempted premeditated murder.
We agree. Where it is impossible to determine which theory the jury used to convict on a charge of attempted first degree murder, and the facts could support a guilty verdict on either theory, the attempted murder conviction must be vacated and the case returned for retrial on the charge of first degree premeditated murder. Thompson v. State, 667 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 3d DCA opinion filed January 31,1996).
Therefore, we affirm the first degree murder conviction, reverse the convictions for attempted first degree murder and remand for a retrial on charges of attempted first degree premeditated murder. Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.
. The defendant’s confession and the testimony of four eyewitnesses was introduced as evidence. His fingerprints were also found on one of the vehicles and defense counsel conceded that Meeks had fired the shots that killed the victim.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mitchell v. State, 678 So. 2d 1362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…reply to initial remarks made by defense counsel and, when considered in context, did not constitute prejudicial error so as to require a new trial. Lynn v. State, 395 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. den., 402 So. 2d 611 (Fla.1981); Meeks v. State, 667 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. den., 677 So. 2d 840 (Fla.1996); Irving v. State, 627 So. 2d 92 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Shaara v. State, 581 So. 2d 1339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Cook v. State, 391 [*1364] So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). We affirm Mitchell’s conviction.…
-
Williamson v. State, 671 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…ed in Florida. See State v. Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla.1995). Because it is impossible to determine which theory the jury used to convict defendant and because the facts could support a guilty verdict on either theory, we reverse. See Meeks v. State, 667 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). See also Tape v. State, 661 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Harris v. State, 658 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Lamb v. State, 668. So. 2d 666 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). The state contends that this court has authority to reduce ea…
-
Ford v. Singletary, 689 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…lied on to convict Ford of attempted first degree murder, the attempted murder conviction must be vacated and the case remanded for a retrial on the charge of attempted first degree murder. State v. Wilson, 680 So. 2d 411 (Fla.1996); Meeks v. State, 667 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 677 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 1996). We therefore grant the petition and vacate Ford’s conviction and sentence for attempted first degree murder and remand this cause for retrial on the charge of attempted premeditated murder.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. DiGUILIO, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986)
- Ferguson v. State, 417 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 1982)
- Green v. State, 475 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1985)
- Thompson v. State, 667 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Kern Ron Davis v. State, 590 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)