FREDERICK L. CANADY, 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.
Affirmed conviction for attempted felony murder where evidence sufficiently established the underlying felony of attempted robbery through victim testimony of demand for money and accomplice testimony of pre-planning.
Evidence of an attempted robbery underlying an attempted felony murder conviction is sufficient when the victim testifies the defendant demanded money and accomplices testify to pre-planning the robbery.
[1] Evidence of an attempted robbery is sufficient to support an attempted felony murder conviction when the victim testifies to a demand for money and accomplices testify to…
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“He asked me where's the money.”
Victim's testimony regarding what Canady said during the robbery attempt.
Canady and accomplices entered a convenience store; Canady restrained the victim while a gunman shot him; the victim testified Canady asked where the …
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 Attempted Felony Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, C.J.
Frederick Canady appeals his conviction for attempted felony murder. We affirm.
Canady contends that there was insufficient evidence of the underlying felony of attempted robbery, to support his conviction for attempted felony murder. The victim testified that when Canady came into the victim’s convenience store, Canady immediately restrained the victim and told his cohort, the gunman, to shoot. The victim testified that after he was shot, he saw people on the street outside and began yelling for help. Canady and the gunman then tried to take him to the beer cooler at the back of the store. The victim initially testified that he did not recall hearing either man ask for money, but later, when asked if either of the men asked in any way for money, the victim replied, ‘When Canady hold me, ask money, I show him at the cashier.... In just in a very quick moment he just say that [sic].” Asked for Canady’s exact words, the victim testified, “He asked me where’s the money.” There was testimony by Byrd, the getaway driver, that the trio had driven around earlier in the day thinking about whether to rob the store, at which, Canady had told the others, they could get some “easy money.” Although at trial Byrd and Canady tried to minimize the sense of purpose the trio had, they admitted having discussed the robbery while driving around. Further, Byrd testified that they obtained a gun and a mask, that his assignment was to be the getaway driver, and that the gunman’s assignment was to be the lookout. We think this evidence was sufficient proof of the underlying felony of attempted robbery.
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.