JOSE ALEJANDRO GALDAMEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JOSE ALEJANDRO GALDAMEZ, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
713 So. 2d 1128
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1998)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Jose Alejandro Galdamez appeals his conviction for attempted second-degree murder as a lesser-included offense of attempted first-degree murder. He contends under the logic of State v. Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla.1995), there should be no such crime as attempted second-degree murder. We reject that argument on authority of Gentry v. State, 437 So. 2d 1097 (Fla.1983), and Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Olivera v. State, 719 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…tructions do not require the state to prove that the defendant intended to kill. We reject that claim on the authority of Gentry v. State, 437 So. 2d 1097, 1099 (Fla.1983); Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62, 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); and Galdamez v. State, 713 So. 2d 1128, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1749 (Fla. 3d DCA July 29, 1998). Affirmed.…
-
Lamontique Lavell Gilyard v. State, 718 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…d argues that the rationale of State v. Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla.1995), should be extended to preclude conviction of that crime. We reject that argument under the authority of Gentry v. State, 437 So. 2d 1097 (Fla.1983). See also Galdamez v. State, 713 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Quesenberry v. State, 711 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62, 62-63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); and Watkins v. State, 705 So. 2d 938, 939 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). AFFIRMED. BARFIELD, C.J., DAVIS, J., and SHIVER…
-
Manka v. State, 720 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…pted second-degree murder has been reviewed on appeal in two districts; neither has questioned reliance upon Gentry in light of the Gray decision, and each has affirmed the existence of the crime of attempted second-degree murder. Galdamez v. State, 713 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Quesenberry v. State, 711 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). We conclude that Gentry remains controlling and affirm. As to all other issues raised, we also affirm. WARNER and GROSS,…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Collin Gray, 654 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1995)
- Davis v. State, 437 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 1983)
- Pitts v. State, 710 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)