CRAIG SHAWN CUMMINGS, 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.
Craig Shawn Cummings was convicted of first-degree murder, shooting into an occupied vehicle, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. On appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of evidence for premeditation and raised jury selection issues. The court affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient evidence of premeditation and noting that other issues were either unpreserved or harmless.
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish premeditation because the time it took Cummings to follow the victim from the apartment and approach the vehicle was sufficient time to reflect on the nature and probable result of the act. The jury challenge issue was not preserved for appeal, and no other errors were shown or any existing errors were harmless.
[1] Premeditation in first-degree murder requires a fully formed conscious purpose to kill, formed for a sufficient length of time to permit reflection on the nature of the a…
[2] Premeditation may be proven by circumstantial evidence, but such evidence must be inconsistent with every other reasonable inference.
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“Premeditation is the essential element which distinguishes first-degree murder from second-degree murder. Premeditation is defined as more than a mere intent to kill; it is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill. This purpose to kill may be formed a moment before the act but must exist for a sufficient length of time to permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed and the probable result of that act.”
Establishes the legal definition and essential requirements of premeditation for first-degree murder
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCummings and the victim engaged in a heated argument in Cummings' apartment. The victim then left the apartment and returned to his vehicle. After the…
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 Shooting Into An Occupied Vehicle cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, Judge.
Craig Shawn Cummings was convicted of first-degree murder, shooting into an occupied vehicle, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He appeals; we affirm.
Cummings first argues that the evidence was insufficient to establish premeditation. The supreme court dealt generally with this subject in Coolen v. State, 696 So. 2d 738, 741 (Fla.1997), and held:
Premeditation is the essential element which distinguishes first-degree murder from second-degree murder. Wilson v. State, 493 So. 2d 1019 (Fla.1986). Premeditation is defined as more than a mere intent to kill; it is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill. This purpose to kill may be formed a moment before the act but must exist for a sufficient length of time to permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed and the probable result of that act.
Id. at 1021. While premeditation may be proven by circumstantial evidence, the evidence relied upon by the State must be inconsistent with every other reasonable inference.
In Coolen, evidence showing that there had been no argument between Coolen and the victim before Coolen “came out of nowhere” and stabbed the victim was held insufficient to establish the required premeditation. In our ease, however, there were several eye witnesses that testified that the victim and Cummings were engaged in a heated argument before the victim walked out of Cummings’ apartment and returned to the vehicle in which he had arrived. After the victim was seated in the vehicle, Cummings came out of his apartment, approached to within a few feet of the victim and shot him several times. We believe that the jury could properly determine that the time it took Cummings to follow the victim out of his apartment and to approach the vehicle was sufficient time to reflect on the nature of the act about to be committed and that Cummings understood the probable result of firing four or five bullets into the victim. We find the evidence of premeditation to be sufficient under Coolen.
Cummings’ objection to the State’s exercise of a jury challenge involving an African-American was not preserved for appeal. See Joiner v. State, 618 So. 2d 174 (Fla.1993); Melbourne v. State, 679 So. 2d 759 (Fla.1996).
We find no merit to Cummings’ other issues on appeal either because no error was shown or any existing error was harmless.
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH and THOMPSON, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Skanes v. State, 821 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…ly sufficient to establish premeditation, but it was inconsistent with any other reasonable inference. See, e.g. Blackwood; Dufault v. State, 800 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Adams v. State, 799 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Cummings v. State, 696 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Finally, Skanes argues the prosecutor made numerous improper comments during closing argument. Defense counsel did not object to all of these comments, but Skanes contends cumulatively they constitute fundamental error. It does…
-
Kattick v. State, 743 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…ck”] appeals his judgment and sentence for first-degree murder. Kattick principally contends1 that the trial court erroneously denied his motion for judgment of acquittal because the evidence of premeditation was insufficient. In Cummings v. State, 696 So. 2d 1306, 1307 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), this court found that the defendant’s pursuit of the victim after a heated argument constituted premeditation: In our case ... there were several eye witnesses [sic] that testified that the victim and Cummings were engage…
Authorities Cited
- Jeanie H. Melbourne v. State, 679 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1996)
- Joiner v. State, 618 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 1993)
- Wilson v. State, 493 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 1986)
- Coolen v. State, 696 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 1997)