JIMMY LEE WALKER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Upward Departure Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this consolidated appeal, the appellant challenges his judgments and sentences, imposed after separate jury trials, in lower court case numbers 94-1448, 94-1450, and 94-3232. We reject his arguments in support of reversal in ease numbers 94-1450 and 94-3232 and affirm. We agree, however, that the kidnapping conviction in case number 94-1448 must be reversed and vacated because the victim’s movement and confinement was inconsequential and inherent in relation to the felony of robbery. See Faison v. State, 426 So. 2d 963 (Fla.1983). We otherwise affirm the other convictions and sentences in that case.1
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
RYDER, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur. . Because the appellant does not challenge the trial court's upward departure sentence in this case, there is no need to remand for resentencing as to the affirmed convictions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. James, 867 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…led to non-retreat instruction when attacked at his place of business); State v. Smith, 376 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)(holding manager of store not obligated to retreat when attacked in or immediately adjacent to store). But see Frazier v. State, 681 So. 2d 824, 825 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)(agreeing that castle doctrine protects a worker in the workplace but making an exception where the aggressor was a co-worker). To date, this has been the only extension of the “castle doctrine” protection to a person not atta…
-
In re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIM. CASES-REPORT 2017-07., 257 So. 3d 908 (Fla. 2018)…e the person attacked has a proprietary or near proprietary interest in the place where he is assaulted which is cloaked with a certain privacy protection ...."), quashed in part on other grounds , 403 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1981) ; see Frazier v. State , 681 So. 2d 824, 825 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1996) (agreeing with the Third District Court of Appeal that the "castle doctrine" "extends to protect persons in their place of employment while they are lawfully engaged in their occupation"). The amendments as reflected in the…
-
Hilary Unis v. State, 717 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…e ‘castle’.” Roger v. State, 670 So. 2d 160, 162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (castle doctrine instruction was inapplicable where victim was living in defendant’s home when murder occurred, and had equal rights to occupy the home); see also Frazier v. State, 681 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (castle doctrine does not apply at workplace where aggressor is a co-worker, as both coworkers have a lawful right to be at the work site where the altercation occurs). Appellant’s conviction is, therefore, affirmed. STONE, C.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Faison v. State, 426 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1983)