DAVID LANZAFAME, 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.
David Lanzafame's conviction for first-degree murder is affirmed. The court found sufficient evidence of premeditation where Lanzafame, along with conspirators, lured the victim to a park and struck him in the head more than ten times with a baseball bat, causing his death from multiple blunt force trauma.
The conviction for first-degree murder is affirmed. The record contains sufficient evidence of premeditation to support the trial court's denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal. The nature, manner, and number of wounds inflicted demonstrate an intent to kill rather than merely scare, and the circumstances rebut any claim of sudden heat of passion.
[1] Sufficient evidence of premeditation exists to support a conviction for first-degree murder when the defendant uses a weapon to inflict multiple blows to the victim's hea…
[2] Premeditation is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill that may be formed in a moment and need only exist for such a time as will allow the accused to be conscious of…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Premeditation is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill that may be formed in a moment and need only exist for such a time as will allow the accused to be conscious of the nature of the act about to be committed and the probable result of that act.”
Establishes the legal standard for premeditation, emphasizing it may be formed instantaneously and requires only brief reflection.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLanzafame conspired with Robyn O'Bryon and John Sites to lure Robyn's husband to a park. Armed with a baseball bat, Lanzafame and Sites waited over an…
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 Circumstantial Evidence Of Premeditation cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, J.
We affirm David Lanzafame’s conviction for first-degree murder. The record reflects sufficient evidence of premeditation to support the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal.
The victim was the husband of Robyn O’Bryon (Robyn), who was living with Lanzafame at the time of the murder. Lanzafame’s statement to the police reflects that he conspired with Robyn and John Sites (Sites) to lure the victim to a park with the intent of inflicting bodily harm. Pursuant to their plan, Lanzafame and Sites hid in the park, armed with a baseball bat. When the victim appeared, he was pushed down and Lanzafame hit him in the head with the bat. Thereafter, Lanzafame and Sites dragged the victim down to the lake and placed the body, face down, into the water. At trial, Lanzafame testified that he conspired to scare the victim. He repeatedly denied going to the park with the intent to inflict physical harm. Lanzafame stated that, while en route to the park, he went to his parents’ home to pick up a baseball bat. Once at the park, they waited for over an hour before they observed the victim. Sites then tackled the victim, forcing him to the ground. At that point, Lanzafame said that he picked up the bat and, in an uncontrollable rage, hit the victim numerous times. During the beating, the victim asked if they could talk, but Lanzafame kept hitting him with the bat. According to Lanzafame, Sites dragged the victim to the edge of the lake and deposited his body into the water. Lanza-fame then threw the bat into the water and left the park. The bloody baseball bat containing Lanzafame’s father’s name was found approximately fifty feet from the victim’s body.
The cause of death was multiple blunt trauma to the head. There were in excess of ten lacerations on the victim’s head. Each laceration was caused by a separate strike. The medical examiner stated that the type of injury inflicted would cause the victim to instantly lose consciousness and die within a matter of minutes.
“Premeditation is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill that may be formed in a moment and need only exist for such a time as will allow the accused to be conscious of the nature of the act about to be committed and the probable result of that act.” Spencer v. State, 645 So. 2d 377, 381 (Fla.1994). The duration of the premeditation is immaterial, so long as there is time for reflection prior to the act. See Wilson v. State, 493 So. 2d 1019, 1021 (Fla.1986).
Premeditation may be established by circumstantial evidence, including “the nature of the weapon used, the presence or absence of adequate provocation, previous difficulty between the parties, the manner in which the homicide was committed, and the nature and manner of the wounds inflicted.” Larry v. State, 104 So. 2d 352, 354 (Fla.1958); see also Holton v. State, 573 So. 2d 284, 289 (Fla.1990).
Here, the nature and manner of the wounds inflicted support a conclusion that there was an intent to kill, rather than, as alleged, simply an intent to scare. See Jimenez v. State, 703 So. 2d 437 (Fla.1997)(finding sufficient evidence of premeditation where defendant stabbed the victim multiple times in her chest cavity), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1123, 118 S.Ct. 1806, 140 L.Ed.2d 945 (1998). The record reflects that Lanzafame, without provocation, deliberately used a baseball bat to hit the victim in excess of ten times. All of the strikes were directed at the victim’s head. This evidence supports a finding of premeditation.
Further, the circumstances leading up to the crime, as well as the manner in which the murder was accomplished, are sufficiently probative to controvert Lanzafame’s “heat of passion” argument. See Roberts v. State, 510 So. 2d 885 (Fla.1987)(rejecting the claim of sudden heat of passion where the defendant went to his car, got a bat, and repeatedly bludgeoned the victim in the back of the head), holding limited on other grounds by Lewis v. State, 591 So. 2d 922 (Fla.1991).
Accordingly, the first-degree murder conviction is affirmed.
WARNER, C.J. and DELL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jerone Hunter v. State, 8 So. 3d 1052 (Fla. 2008)…imposed, where death could have been but was not sought, and cases from other states and federal decisions. Hunter further argues that the imposition of the death sentence in this case is not consistent with Florida cases, citing Lanzafame v. State, 751 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), or with cases from other states, citing In re Elkins, 144 Cal.App.4th 475, 50 Cal.Reptr.3d 503 (2006). Finally, he contends that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Pulley v. Harris, 465 U.S. 37, 104 S.Ct. 871, 79 L.Ed…
-
Henry v. State, 145 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…that appellant continued this savage beating even after Mr. Arroyo lay motionless on the ground. This behavior was clearly in disregard for human life and was arguably sufficient to support even a first degree murder charge. Cf. Lanzafame v. State, 751 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (affirming first degree murder conviction in case where defendant repeatedly hit the victim in the head with a baseball bat). Furthermore, appellant’s assault on Mr. Arroyo — while obviously an “overreaction” — was not an “impuls…
-
Samuels v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (M.D. Fla. 2020)…e of premeditation. (Respondent’s Exhibit 2 at 710–15). Considering the circumstances leading up to the murder, including the death threat and how the deadly wounds were inflicted, the state court’s ruling was not unreasonable. Lanzafame v. State, 751 So. 2d 628, 630 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). The jury’s finding of guilt did not fall below that “threshold of bare rationality.” Coleman, 566 U.S. at 656. Samuels argues that the evidence proved that he “acted in a reactive state” and in “an act of passion as oppo…
Authorities Cited
- Dusty Ray Spencer v. State, 645 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1994)
- Holton v. State, 573 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 1990)
- Wilson v. State, 493 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 1986)
- Larry v. State, 104 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1958)
- Roberts v. State, 510 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1987)
- Jimenez v. State, 703 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 1997)
- Lewis v. State, 591 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1991)
- Russell v. United States, 523 U.S. 1123 (U.S. 1998)
- Brown v. Pennsylvania, 523 U.S. 1123 (U.S. 1998)