TAKOYA CRINER, 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.
Criner appeals his convictions and sentences for two counts of first-degree murder and one count of attempted first-degree murder. The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the convictions, rejecting challenges to the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal, the sufficiency of evidence for premeditation, and claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
The trial court properly denied the motion for judgment of acquittal because the state presented direct evidence (testimony from a surviving victim) sufficient to allow a jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The state presented substantial evidence of premeditation, including the loaded handgun brought to the scene, the thirty-minute interval before the shooting, the sudden and unprovoked nature of the attack, and Criner's flight. Claims of ineffective assistance based on strategic decisions not apparent on the face of the record will not be reviewed on direct appeal.
[1] A motion for judgment of acquittal should be granted only when no reasonable inference of guilt can be drawn from the evidence presented.
[2] When considering a motion for judgment of acquittal, the court must admit all facts stated in the evidence and every conclusion favorable to the prosecution that a jury m…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“A judgment of acquittal should only be granted when the jury cannot reasonably view the evidence in any manner favorable to the opposing party.”
Establishes the standard for reviewing motions for judgment of acquittal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCriner shot multiple victims using a .380 semiautomatic handgun. He spent approximately thirty minutes with the victims drinking beer and playing vide…
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 First Degree Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Criner appeals his convictions and sentences for two counts of first-degree murder and one count of attempted first-degree murder. Criner raises ten issues on appeal. We affirm and only address three issues raised by appellant.
Criner argues the trial court erred when it denied his motion for judgment of acquittal. When a defendant moves for a judgment of acquittal, he “admits not only the facts stated in the evidence adduced, but also admits every conclusion favorable to the adverse party that a jury might fairly and reasonably infer from the evidence.” Lynch v. State, 293 So. 2d 44, 45 (Fla.1974).
A judgment of acquittal should only be granted when the jury cannot reasonably view the evidence in any manner favorable to the opposing party. Id. Contrary to Criner’s assumption, the state did not rest this prosecution on circumstantial evidence. In this case, the state presented testimony from one of the victims that Criner, without provocation, fired multiple times while shooting the victims from behind. Under the appropriate standard of review, the trial judge properly denied Criner’s motion for judgment of acquittal. See Jones v. State, 790 So. 2d 1194, 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“If the evidence is legally sufficient to support the elements of the alleged crime, the trial court has no discretion to acquit the defendant by taking the case from the jury.”).
Criner also argues the state failed to prove premeditation.
At trial, the state offered evidence that Criner committed the murders with a .380 semiautomatic handgun. The state’s evidence supports an inference that Criner brought the loaded handgun to the scene of the crime. One of Criner’s victims testified that Cri-ner drank beer and played video games with the victims for thirty minutes prior to the killings. The victim testified that Cri-ner simply started shooting the victims in the absence of any provocation. Expert testimony revealed that Criner shot the victims from behind while they played video games.
The evidence also indicated that, after the shootings, Criner fled to a waiting car, which then sped away.
Accordingly, the state presented substantial evidence showing Criner acted with premeditation. See Dupree v. State, 615 So. 2d 713, 715 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).
Finally, Criner argues ineffective assistance on direct appeal. The grounds raised all concern strategic decisions made by defense counsel. As the claims of ineffective assistance are not apparent on the face of the record, we decline to review them. See Grant v. State, 622 So. 2d 186, 187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). The convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
KAHN, BENTON, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Burns v. State, 132 So. 3d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…o support the verdict and judgment.” Tibbs v. State, 397 So. 2d 1120, 1123 (Fla.1981). “A judgment of acquittal should only be granted when the jury cannot reasonably view the evidence in any manner favorable to the opposing party.” Criner v. State, 943 So. 2d 224, 225 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (citing Lynch, 293 So. 2d at 45). Section 827.03 defines “[n]eglect of a child” as: 1. A caregiver’s failure or omission to provide a child with the care, supervision, and services necessary to maintain the child’s physica…
-
Celeste Chambers v. State, 200 So. 3d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…a. 1st DCA 2016). A judgment of acquittal is properly granted only “when the jury cannot reasonably view the evidence in any manner favorable to the opposing party.” Burns v. State, 132 So. 3d 1238, 1240 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (quoting Criner v. State, 943 So. 2d 224, 225 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)). Under section 812.014(2)(c)l, Florida Statutes (2014), theft is grand theft in the third degree if the property stolen is “[vjalued at $300 or more, but less than $5,000.”. “Value” is defined as “the market value of the p…
-
Takoya Criner v. State, 59 So. 3d 196 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…ld have been litigated before the trial court or on direct appeal. The court apparently overlooked that claim ten involved assertions of ineffective assistance of counsel—claims the appellant was unable to litigate on direct appeal. Criner v. State, 943 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (holding that Defendant’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were not cognizable on direct appeal, where such claims were not apparent on the face of the record); see also McKinney v. State, 579 So. 2d 80, 82 (Fla.1991)…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lynch v. State, 293 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 1974)
- Jones v. State, 790 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Dupree v. State, 615 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Silas Grant v. State, 622 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)