TERRELL CARLTON GLEE, 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.
Terrell Carlton Glee appealed his conviction for second-degree murder and tampering with evidence. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient evidence of criminal agency and that the state presented adequate evidence to support Glee's responsibility for the victim's death.
The court affirmed, finding: (1) sufficient evidence established criminal agency through the medical examiner's testimony using accepted forensic methodology; (2) sufficient circumstantial evidence created a jury question on Glee's responsibility for the victim's death; (3) proper exclusion of the Michelle murder evidence due to dissimilarity and unclear hearsay issues; and (4) proper exercise of discretion in excluding the blanket access testimony as too speculative without corroborating evidence linking McCall to the death.
[1] Evidence of criminal agency is sufficient when a medical examiner testifies that the victim's death was determined by a process of exclusion to be a homicide, and that th…
[2] A jury question on responsibility for a victim's death is created by evidence that the defendant was last seen with the victim arguing, the victim's body was found in the…
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“Dr. Gore, the Orange County Medical Examiner, testified that he had been able to determine by a process of exclusion that the victim died as the result of a homicide, and not as the result of a drug or alcohol overdose or of natural causes. Dr. Gore further testified that this process of exclusion was an accepted methodology in forensic medicine.”
Establishes the sufficiency of the medical examiner's testimony to prove criminal agency
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe victim was last seen alive in Glee's company while the two were arguing. Her body was subsequently found in the trunk of the vehicle in which she …
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 Criminal Agency cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, C.J.
Terrell Carlton Glee [“Glee”] appeals his conviction for second-degree murder and tampering with evidence. We find no error and affirm.
The trial court did not err in denying Glee’s motion for a judgment of acquittal on the ground that the evidence failed to show that the victim died as the result of someone’s criminal agency. At trial, Dr. Gore, the Orange County Medical Examiner, testified that he had been able to determine by a process of exclusion that the victim died as the result of a homicide, and not as the result of a drug or alcohol overdose or of natural causes. Dr. Gore further testified that this process of exclusion was an accepted methodology in forensic medicine. This evidence was sufficient to establish criminal agency and to contradict the hypothesis that the victim died of natural causes or an overdose.
The state also presented sufficient evidence to create a question for the jury on whether Glee was responsible for the victim’s death. The evidence showed that she was last seen alive in Glee’s company; the two were arguing; her body was found in the trunk of the vehicle in which she had been seen with Glee; and her body was wrapped in a quilt that apparently came from the trader in which Glee was living. This evidence creates a question for the jury on whether Glee killed the victim.
There was also no error in the exclusion of evidence that the victim’s former boyfriend, Sam McCall [“McCall”], was being investigated for the murder of a woman named “Michelle” and that he had “jumped” Michelle for money and drugs. The proffer made by Glee failed to establish the requisite similarity between the incident involving “Michelle” and the events leading up to the victim’s death. There was no showing that Michelle was murdered in the same manner as the victim, or even for similar reasons. In fact, it was unclear from the proffer precisely how Michelle died, and precisely what connection McCall had to that event. It is also unknown whether the testimony on this issue came directly from statements made by McCall and therefore was subject to a hearsay exception, or whether it constituted inadmissible hearsay.
A closer question is whether the trial court abused its discretion in excluding testimony that McCall had access to the blanket draped over the victim’s body and that the blanket had not been seen since McCall moved out. We conclude it was within the trial court’s discretion to exclude this evidence because of the lack of any evidence other than the blanket tying McCall to the victim’s death. Absent such evidence, the theory that McCall had murdered the victim was too speculative for this, court to find harmful error. AFFIRMED.
ANTOON, J., concurs.
THOMPSON, J., concurs in result only.