GREGORY WILSON, 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 the evidence was sufficient to support a manslaughter conviction and that the defendant was not entitled to a judgment of acquittal based on justifiable homicide.
The defendant was convicted of manslaughter after using excessive force that led to the victim's death. The victim was handcuffed and leg-ironed, and …
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 Use Of Deadly Force cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, J.
Gregory Wilson [‘Wilson’’] appeals his conviction for manslaughter. We find no error on the lower court’s denial of Wilson’s motion for a judgment of acquittal. There was evidence from which the factfinder could have concluded that Wilson knew or should have known that hyperextension of the victim’s neck was likely to cause death or serious bodily injury. There was also evidence that great force was used to hyperextend his neck and that the hyperextension continued for a significant period of time.
Nor is there merit to Wilson’s argument that he was entitled to a judgment of acquittal on the ground that the death was “justifiable homicide.” Florida law permits the use of deadly force only if a defendant “reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.” § 776.012, Fla. Stat. (1995). Florida law also permits the use of force by law enforcement officers and/or correctional officers if the officer or correctional officer has a “reasonable belief’ that such force is necessary to prevent a defendant’s escape from custody or from a penal institution. Here, however, the victim was handcuffed to the chair and had his leg irons on. Wilson himself admitted that he was not concerned for any officer’s safety. The reasonableness of Wilson’s belief that the use of deadly force was necessary was a question for the jury.
Finally, Wilson claims on appeal that the evidence failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that his use of the towel was the proximate cause of the victim’s death, given evidence that there were defects in the equipment which corrections officers attempted to use to revive the victim and that the victim did not die for seven days. This issue was not raised below; moreover, evidence of these subsequent events would not absolve Wilson of culpability.
AFFIRMED.
W. SHARP, and PLEUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barnes v. State, 969 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…returned fire in self-defense. Whether a person in his position may have felt he could not safely retreat under fire, like the reasonableness of his belief that his use of deadly force was necessary, was a question for the jury. See Wilson v. State, 765 So. 2d 950, 951 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); see also Dias v. State, 812 So. 2d 487, 491 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). The most closely analogous case is Ortiz, 942 So. 2d 1013, where the court considered the same instruction and rejected the State’s suggestion that the defen…