ANTHONY LAWRENCE, 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.
The court held that an erroneous jury instruction on the intent element of burglary requires reversal and a new trial for that charge.
Defendant was convicted of burglary and other offenses. The jury instruction for burglary incorrectly stated the required intent element.…
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 Throwing A Deadly Missile cases and more on FLexlaw
GOSHORN, J.
Anthony Lawrence was convicted of burglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery therein, attempted aggravated battery with great bodily harm, throwing a deadly missile, and criminal mischief stemming from his entry into the victim’s home and the ensuing confrontation. We must reverse and remand for a new trial on the burglary charge based upon the erroneous jury instruction.
After correctly informing the jury of the first two elements of burglary, the jury was instructed that the third element it had to find in order to convict on the burglary charge was whether at the time of entering or remaining in the structure [Defendant] had a fully-formed conscious intent to commit the offense of burglary of a structure,....
(Emphasis added). This is an incorrect statement of the element, which requires that a defendant enter with the “intent to commit an offense therein.” See State v. Waters, 436 So. 2d 66, 69 (Fla.1983). The fundamental instructional error requires reversal for a new trial on that charge.1 See Harrison v. State, 743 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1999); Davis v. State, 736 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), clarified, 736 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Defendant’s remaining convictions are affirmed.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part; REMANDED.
DAUKSCH and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . If, on remand, the State decides to retry Defendant, the trial court should be cognizant of Crawford v. State, 662 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (same battery cannot be used to both enhance a burglary offense and support an aggravated battery conviction).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Valentine v. State, 774 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…se cases, did not require the jury to find the defendant intended to commit a specific crime, as did the instruction in this case; i.e., “intent to commit the offense of burglary with an assault or battery in that conveyance.” See Lawrence v. State, 746 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (“at the time of entering or remaining in the structure [Defendant] had a fully-formed conscious intent to commit the offense of a burglary of a structure”); Harrison v. State, 743 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (jury instructed i…1 / 2
-
LEE v. State, 958 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…ary conviction without prejudice to his seeking relief through a sworn Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure Rule 3.850 motion. Id. Other district courts have held that the circular burglary instruction constitutes fundamental error. Lawrence v. State, 746 So. 2d 1252, 1253 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Harrison v. State, 743 So. 2d 178, 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). In fact, the Fourth District in Bruce v. State, 879 So. 2d 686, 687-88 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), held that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue on dir…
-
Long v. State, 188 So. 3d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…ruct the jury in this regard.” Id. at 825. The court went on to find that the error was fundamental, because the effect of the instruction was essentially that the jury was instructed on trespass, a different offense. Id. See also Lawrence v. State, 746 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Harrison v. State, 743 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Puskac v. State, 735 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Our sister courts have also found that counsel’s failure to raise this fundamental error on appeal constitutes ineffecti…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Waters, 436 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 1983)
- Art Crawford v. State, 662 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Osby Davis v. State, 736 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Green v. State, 743 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Alphanso E. Harrison v. State, 743 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)