JIM LEE MCGAHEE, 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.
Appellant's cocaine sale conviction is reversed because the trial court failed to instruct the jury that knowledge of the substance's illicit nature was a required element under the law applicable to the offense date.
The trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that knowledge of the substance's illicit nature was an essential element of the cocaine sale offense.
[1] When a drug offense predates the enactment of a statute eliminating knowledge of the illicit nature of a controlled substance as an essential element, the trial court mus…
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 intelligenceAppellant was charged with selling or delivering cocaine within 200 feet of a public park on July 27, 2000, before the enactment of section 893.101, F…
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 Knowledge Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this direct appeal from conviction for sale or delivery of cocaine, Appellant raises several issues, only one of which merits discussion. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that in order to convict, the jury had to find that Appellant knew that the substance that changed hands was cocaine. We agree and reverse and remand for a new trial.
Appellant was alleged to havd sold or delivered cocaine within 200 feet of a public park on July 27, 2000. The date of the offense preceded the enactment of section 893.101, Florida Statutes, which provides that knowledge of the illicit nature of the controlled substance is not an essential element of a drug offense under chapter 893, Florida Statutes. Therefore, the trial court was required to give the requested instruction on the knowledge element. See Norman v. State, 826 So. 2d 440, 440-41 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). The trial court’s failure to properly instruct the jury on each of the elements of the offense mandates reversal and remand for a new trial before a jury instructed in the manner required by McMillon v. State, 813 So. 2d 56, 58 (Fla.2002). See Norman, 826 So. 2d at 440-41.
Accordingly we reverse Appellant’s conviction and sentence and remand for a new trial.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BARFIELD, DAVIS, and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- McMILLON v. State, 813 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2002)
- Norman v. State, 826 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)