TRAVIS ALONZO FLEMMINGS, 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.
Court reversed murder and robbery convictions because trial court erred in refusing to give an independent act jury instruction when evidence supported that defendant did not know of or participate in the robbery plan.
Where evidence supports a theory of independent act, a defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on that theory even if other evidence supports guilt.
[1] Where any evidence supporting a theory of independent act has been presented at trial, the defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on that theory regardless of other…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Where any evidence which would support the theory of independent act has been presented, the defendant is entitled to the jury instruction.”
Court stating the legal standard for when independent act instruction must be given, citing Parker v. State.
Flemmings was convicted of first degree murder and robbery arising from a killing committed by his cofelon Santiago. Flemmings consistently maintained…
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 Independent Act Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PLEUS, J.
Flemmings was convicted of first degree murder and robbery as a result of his participation in a killing committed by his cofelon, Santiago. Although the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to support the convictions, there was ample evidence to warrant giving the independent act instruction.1 Specifically, the jury heard two police interviews with Flem-mings in which he maintained he knew nothing about a plan to rob the victim. He also testified to the same at trial. Even the state’s key witness impheating Flem-mings, John Polanco, did so only in his seventh interview with police after he had struck a deal for his testimony. In his first six interviews, Polanco maintained there was no plan to rob the victim. Instead, consistent with Flemmings’ testimony, Polanco told police the group merely sought to buy drugs from the victim and that Flemmings was surprised when Santiago shot the victim. All this evidence was placed before the jury. Any of it would have warranted the independent act instruction. “Where any evidence which would support the theory of independent act has been presented, the defendant is entitled to the jury instruction.” Parker v. State, 458 So. 2d 750, 752 (Fla.1984); Barfield v. State, 762 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). See also McGee v. State, 792 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Accordingly, we reluctantly reverse and remand for a new trial.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
GRIFFIN and TORPY, JJ., concur. . See Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3.04(h).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Worley v. State, 848 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…have the jury instructed on his or her theory of defense if there is any evidence to support this theory, and so long as the theory is recognized as valid under the law of the state. See Mora v. State, 814 So. 2d 322 (Fla.2002); Flemmings v. State, 838 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Because Worley’s theory is faulty, we find no error in the court’s decision not to give the entrapment instruction. Worley sold about 500 pills containing MDMA, aggregating 82.4 grams, to an undercover officer and a confidentia…
-
Jarrord Roberts v. State, 4 So. 3d 1261 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…g, causing, encouraging, assisting, or advising the other person to either commit or attempt to commit the crime. The independent act theory allows, under narrow circumstances, a limit to that broad scope of culpability. See also Flemmings v. State, 838 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (independent act instruction should have been given where evidence indicated Flemmings did not know of the robbery plan); McGee v. State, 792 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (reversing for failing to give an independent act instru…
-
Harvey v. State, 26 So. 3d 685 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…ncluded that his co-felons exceeded the scope of the original plan in committing the sexual battery. As such, the Court held that the defendant was entitled to receive an instruction on the independent act doctrine. Similarly, in Flemmings v. State, 838 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003), the defendant was convicted of robbery and first-degree murder after his co-felon killed the robbery victim. The defendant argued that he was entitled to receive the independent act doctrine instruction because there was evidenc…
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
- Parker v. State, 458 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 1984)
- Barfield v. State, 762 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
- Quincy McGEE v. State, 792 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)