JAMES THOMAS LEWIS, 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 voluntary intoxication defense was not available for felony battery, as it is a general intent crime, rendering the statute eliminating the defense inapplicable.
James Lewis was convicted of felony battery after punching the victim during an argument. Lewis requested a jury instruction on voluntary intoxication…
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 Florida Common Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The motion for rehearing is denied. We withdraw our former opinion and substitute the following.
James Lewis was convicted of felony battery in violation of section 784.041 of the Florida Statutes (1999). At trial, the victim’s testimony established that Lewis had been drinking and smoking crack for a substantial amount of time before the two began arguing. She left when he asked, but returned some time later. Lewis became angry when she started to leave a second time and punched her in the face with a force that required stitches and left a scar. Lewis did not put on defense evidence.
However, Lewis requested a jury instruction on voluntary intoxication as a defense. The trial court refused and, upon the state’s request pursuant to section 775.051 of the Florida Statutes (1999), instructed the jury that voluntary intoxication is not a defense to any offense proscribed by law.
Lewis appeals, claiming that the elimination of the voluntary intoxication defense violated his due process rights under the Florida Constitution. Voluntary intoxication was a defense to specific intent crimes under Florida common law. See Garner v. State, 28 Fla. 113, 153-58, 9 So. 835 (1891); Linehan v. State, 442 So. 2d 244, 246 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), approved on other grounds, 476 So. 2d 1262 (Fla.1985). As of October 1, 1999, the Florida Legislature eliminated the defense. See § 775.051, Fla. Stat. (1999).
However, in light of our recent decision in C.B. v. State, we find that the constitutionality of the statute should not be ad dressed in this case. 810 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (recognizing that battery is a general intent crime). The element of intent in felony battery is identical to simple battery. Compare § 784.041(1) with § 784.03(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999). Therefore, felony battery is also a general intent crime and the voluntary intoxication defense would not have been available to Lewis even under previous case law. For this reason, we find that section 775.051 would not apply to this case and affirm the decision of the court below.
AFFIRMED.
GUNTHER, TAYLOR, JJ., and DELL, JOHN W., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Patrick v. State, 104 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 2012)…35 (Fla.1891); Linehan v. State, 442 So. 2d 244, 246 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), approved on other grounds, 476 So. 2d 1262 (Fla.1985). As of October 1, 1999, the Florida Legislature eliminated the defense. See § 775.051, Fla. Stat. (1999). Lewis v. State, 817 So. 2d 933, 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). In Gibbs v. State, 904 So. 2d 432, 437 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), the Fourth District addressed this question. Gibbs argued “that the court erred in instructing the jury that voluntary intoxication is not a defense to any offense…1 / 2
-
Gibbs v. State, 904 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…nated his sole defense, which was that his extreme intoxication went to his degree of guilt. We disagree. As of October 1, 1999, the Florida Legislature eliminated the defense of voluntary intoxication. § 775.051, Fla. Stat. (1999); Lewis v. State, 817 So. 2d 933, 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). The trial court’s instruction tracked the language of section 775.051. While Gibbs argues that the instruction constituted a comment on the evidence, it was a correct statement of the law. Intoxication could not be used to…
-
Alto Daniels, Jr. v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…convictions. This is also a general intent crime. See Crittenden v. State, 137 So. 3d 1170, 1172 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (explaining that felony battery is a general intent crime unless the enhancement statute requires specific intent); Lewis v. State, 817 So. 2d 933, 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (on motion for rehearing) (explaining that felony battery is a general intent crime because the element of intent for felony battery is identical to simple battery). Because all the lesser- included offenses were general int…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Garner v. State, 28 Fla. 113 (Fla. 1891)
- Linehan v. State, 476 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 1985)
- Linehan v. State, 442 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- C.B. v. State, 810 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)