AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.380(B)
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 amended Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.380(b) to clarify that a motion for judgment of acquittal is not waived by the defendant's subsequent introduction of evidence.
The court reviewed its prior decision in Morris v. State, which held that a defendant need not renew a motion for judgment of acquittal after presenti…
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 Waiver Of Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
On our own motion, we amend rule 3.380(b) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure with regard to its provision requiring that a motion for judgment of acquittal be renewed at the close of all the evidence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 2(a) of the Florida Constitution.
In this Court’s opinion in Morris v. State, 721 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1998), we determined that it was unnecessary to require a defendant to renew a motion for judgment of acquittal after the defendant has presented evidence. We reasoned that once the initial motion has been made at the close of the State’s case and brought to the trial court’s attention, the trial court has been given an opportunity to rule on the precise issue, and therefore the initial motion should be preserved for appellate review. Consistent with this reasoning, we amend rule 3.380(b) as follows:
(b) Waiver. A motion for judgment of acquittal is not waived by subsequent introduction of evidence on behalf of the defendant, but after introduction of evidence' by the defendant, the motion -for judgment of acquittal must-be renewed at the close of-all the evidence. The motion must fully set forth the grounds on which it is based.
This amendment shall become effective immediately. Because of this substantial change to the rule by this Court, we direct that the amended rule be advertised in The Florida Bar News; we direct that the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee of The Florida Bar review the rule for comment; and we direct that all interested parties submit comments regarding the rule within sixty days of publication.
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, WELLS, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Brooks v. State, 762 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2000)…tal at the close of all the evidence is no longer necessary to preserve a sufficiency of the evidence claim for appellate review. See Morris v. State, 721 So. 2d 725, 726 (Fla.1998); see also Amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.380(b), 745 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1998) (amending rule 3.380(b) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure to reflect holding in Morris). . Premeditation, as an element of first-degree murder, is defined as more than a mere intent to kill; it is a fully formed conscious purp…
-
Allen v. Butterworth, 756 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2000)…se and the state attorney’s office that tried the case. This Court has recognized that “chapter 119 grants a substantive right to Florida citizens,” on which the Legislature “has the prerogative to place reasonable restrictions.” Henderson v. State, 745 So. 2d 319, 326 (Fla.1999). Section 119.011(3)(d)(2), Florida Statutes (1999), provides ' that criminal intelligence and criminal investigation information shall be considered “active” while such information is directly related' to pending prosecutions or appe…
-
Fla. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg. v. Inv. Corp. OF Palm Beach, 747 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 1999)…till not support their contention that a declaratory statement must be so narrowly tailored. Notwithstanding, the Legislature clearly had some purpose in mind when it deleted the word “only” from section 120.565(1). See generally Henderson v. State, 745 So. 2d 319, 324 (Fla.1999); Beach v. Great Western Bank, 692 So. 2d 146, 152 (Fla.1997), aff'd sub nom. Beach v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, 523 U.S. 410, 118 S.Ct. 1408, 140 L.Ed.2d 566 (1998). Therefore, if the purpose was to “clarify” the statute, a reasonable reading…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Morris v. State, 721 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1998)