GEORGE HENKEL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
GEORGE HENKEL, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
709 So. 2d 130
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1998)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Reversed. See Vazquez v. State, 700 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), rev. granted, 705 So. 2d 902 (Fla.1998). As we said in Vazquez, the standard jury instruction on entrapment does not comport with the dictates of Munoz v. State, 629 So. 2d 90 (Fla.1993). That was the jury instruction given in this case and, as we did in Vazquez, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
WARNER, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miller v. State, 723 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…sonable doubt. We concluded that the above quoted portion of the standard jury instruction does not comport with the dictates of Munoz or “fairly and correctly present the current state of the law on this issue.” Id. at 13. See also Henkel v. State, 709 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). For the reasons stated above, we find that the court committed fundamental error by giving the standard jury instruction on entrapment. Because we are reversing appellant’s conviction on this point, we do not reach the other is…
Authorities Cited
- Munoz v. State, 629 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1993)
- Vazquez v. State, 700 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)