MIGUEL GARCIA, 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.
The court affirmed Garcia's cocaine trafficking conviction, holding that the standard jury instruction for trafficking in cocaine adequately addresses the scienter element and therefore a special instruction on guilty knowledge was not required.
The standard jury instruction for trafficking in cocaine sufficiently charges the jury with the scienter element by instructing that the defendant must have knowingly possessed a certain quantity of cocaine and intended to possess it, so a special instruction on guilty knowledge is not required.
[1] The standard jury instruction for trafficking in cocaine adequately addresses the scienter element by requiring knowing possession and intent, distinguishing it from simp…
Previewing 1 of 1 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 defendant is entitled to a special jury instruction upon request, because the standard instruction does not specifically address guilty knowledge”
The court distinguished Chicone v. State, which required a special instruction for simple possession, from the trafficking context where the standard instruction already includes scienter.
Garcia was prosecuted for trafficking in cocaine. He requested a special jury instruction on guilty knowledge, which the trial court denied.…
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 Guilty Knowledge cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, Chief Judge.
We affirm Appellant’s conviction and sentence for trafficking in cocaine. The sole issue is the trial court’s denial of a request for a special jury instruction on “guilty knowledge.”
In a prosecution for possession of illegal substances, the state must prove that the defendant knew the illicit nature of the substance possessed. Chicone v. State, 684 So. 2d 736 (Fla.1996). Accordingly, the supreme court held that the defendant is entitled to a special jury instruction upon request, because the standard instruction does not specifically address guilty knowledge. Id. at 746.
Unlike the standard jury instruction for possession, the standard instruction for trafficking in cocaine sufficiently charges the jury with the element of scienter. It instructs the jury that the defendant must have knowingly possessed a certain quantity of cocaine and intended to possess cocaine or a mixture containing cocaine. Therefore, it was not error to deny the requested additional instruction. See Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 697 So. 2d 84, 86-87 (Fla.1997) (amending the standard instruction for possession to conform to Chicone, but not amending the trafficking instruction); see also Soirelus v. State, 698 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Because Appellant was convicted of the higher offense, any error as to the instruction given for simple possession is harmless as moot.
GUNTHER and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gena Delice v. State, 878 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…that the State must prove that Delice “knew the substance was cocaine or a mixture containing cocaine.” The State contends that the above instruction was inclusive of the guilty knowledge of the illicit nature element. We agree. In Garcia v. State, 704 So. 2d 1133, 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), this court held: Unlike the standard jury instruction for possession, the standard instruction for trafficking in cocaine sufficiently charges the jury with the element of scienter. It instructs the jury that the defendan…
Authorities Cited
- Chicone v. State, 684 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 1996)
- STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIM. CASES (97-1), 697 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 1997)
- Noelvil Soirelus v. State, 698 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)