JEFFREY HUMBERT, 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.
Conviction for battery by a detained person reversed because the trial court's instruction on the forcible felony exception to self-defense constituted fundamental error that negated the defendant's self-defense claim.
When a defendant claims self-defense based on a single act, instructing the jury on the forcible felony exception to self-defense constitutes fundamental error requiring reversal.
[1] When a defendant claims self-defense based on a single act, instructing the jury on the forcible felony exception to self-defense constitutes fundamental error requiring…
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 intelligenceHumbert, an inmate, struck another inmate claiming self-defense because he reasonably believed the other inmate was about to attack him.…
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 Forcible Felony Exception To Self-Defense cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
Jeffrey Humbert appeals his conviction for battery by person detained in a prison or jail facility (on another detainee) and the prison releasee reoffender (PRR) sentence imposed thereon.1 We reverse the conviction and sentence and remand for a new trial.2
At trial, Humbert testified he struck another inmate in self-defense, reasonably believing the other inmate was about to attack him. At the close of Humbert’s case, the jury was given an instruction on the forcible felony exception to self-defense. This court has held that when a defendant commits a single act and claims self-defense, as is the case here, the giving of this instruction constitutes fundamental error since it essentially negates the defense. See Velazquez v. State, 884 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Bates v. State, 883 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Zuniga v. State, 869 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Accordingly, we reverse Humbert’s conviction and sentence and remand for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
CASANUEVA and VILLANTI, JJ„ Concur. . Humbert argues that the PRR sentence was improper because the jury did not make a separate finding that he had been released from prison within three years of committing his offense. In light of this court’s determination that Humbert’s conviction must be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial, the sentence imposed thereon must also be reversed. Our reversal renders moot the is sue Humbert raises in regard to the PRR sentence imposed.
. Trial court case number 02-001320CF.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Humbert v. State, 933 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…revoked based upon a single violation of condition five. This court subsequently reversed Hum-bert’s conviction in case number 02-1320F due to fundamental error arising from the jury instructions, and we remanded for a new trial. Humbert v. State, 922 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 2d DCA2005). In this appeal both parties correctly agree the revocation order must be reversed and this matter remanded because the trial court revoked Humbert’s probation based exclusively on a conviction which has since been reversed. We re…1 / 2
-
Martinez v. State, 933 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…s sole defense. The only other case relied upon is Baker, where the issue was never ruled [*1167] upon because, despite being granted a belated appeal, Baker did not file one. . Swanson v. State, 921 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Humbert v. State, 922 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Granberry v. State, 919 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Houston v. State, 919 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Shepard v. Crosby, 916 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Newcomb v. State, 913 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Brozey v. S…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Zuniga v. State, 869 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Velazquez v. State, 884 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Bates v. State, 883 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)