STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID O. COLE, JR., 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.
Florida's First District Court of Appeal reversed the dismissal of a manslaughter by culpable negligence charge arising from a fatal automobile accident, finding disputed material facts regarding the defendant's seizure history precluded dismissal as a matter of law.
A trial court errs in dismissing a manslaughter by culpable negligence charge when disputed material facts exist regarding the defendant's medical history and the circumstances of a fatal automobile accident.
[1] A motion to dismiss a manslaughter by culpable negligence charge arising from a vehicular homicide cannot be granted when disputed material facts exist regarding the defe…
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 intelligenceDavid Cole, Jr. was charged with vehicular homicide and manslaughter by culpable negligence following an automobile accident in which a motorist was k…
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 Traverse cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Here, the State appeals from an order granting a motion to dismiss a manslaughter by culpable negligence count in an indictment brought against David Cole, Jr., as the result of an automobile accident in which a motorist was killed. The same order denied dismissal of a vehicular homicide count in the indictment, from which portion of the order Mr. Cole appeals. We affirm the trial court’s ruling regarding the vehicular homicide count, but reverse that portion of the order dismissing the manslaughter count. To the counts in the indictment, the State filed a traverse to Cole’s motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.190(c)(4). Cole argues that the undisputed facts laid out in such motion and traverse will not, as a matter of law, support a conviction for vehicular homicide, much less manslaughter. Without belaboring the facts of the ease as revealed in the motion and traverse, we find that the State has raised disputed issues of material fact regarding Cole’s recent history of seizures and further that the matters alleged in the traverse could result in Cole’s conviction for manslaughter by culpable negligence.
Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further consistent proceedings.
JOANOS, MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Romulus Brinkley, Jr. v. State, 874 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…belief was reasonable, was for a trier-of-fact, the jury, under the facts of this case. These are facts that a jury should consider and give weight. The trial judge could look only to prima facie sufficiency and not evaluate evidence. State v. Cole, 710 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); State v. Bailey, 508 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); State v. Atkinson, 490 So. 2d 1363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); State v. Milton, 488 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); State v. Lukas; State v. Williams, 400 So. 2d 1326 (Fla. 4th DCA…