BRANDON MICHAEL WARD, 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.
The Florida appellate court reversed Ward's convictions for second-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder due to three instructional errors: a misleading jury instruction on the victim's right to use non-deadly force, an improper instruction on the forcible felony exception to self-defense, and a defective manslaughter instruction that improperly added an intent-to-kill element.
A trial court's jury instructions on self-defense, the victim's right to use force, and lesser-included offenses must not mislead the jury or shift focus from the defendant's theory or improperly add elements to the offense.
[1] A jury instruction on the victim's justifiable use of non-deadly force that substitutes the victim's name for the defendant's name in the standard self-defense instructio…
[2] A trial court errs in instructing the jury on the forcible felony exception to self-defense when the defendant claims self-defense and there is no separate forcible felon…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBrandon Michael Ward was charged with second-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder. Ward claimed self-defense as to both charges.…
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
Appellant, Brandon Michael Ward, challenges his convictions and sentences for second-degree murder and attempted second-degree on several grounds, three of which merit discussion. First, the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the charge of attempted first-degree murder that one of the victims was justified in using non-deadly force against Appellant if the victim reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. The substitution of the victim’s name for the defendant’s name in the standard jury instruction on the justifiable use of non-deadly force was misleading and shifted the focus from Appellant’s theory of self-defense to whether or not the victim had a legal right to attack Appellant. Butler v. State, 493 So.2d 451 (Fla.1986). Second, the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the forcible felony exception to self-defense on the charge of attempted first-degree murder because Appellant claimed self-defense as to both charges and there was not a separate forcible felony for the jury to consider. Gilchrist v. State, 938 So.2d 654, 655 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Finally, fundamental error occurred in this case when the trial court gave the standard jury instruction for the lesser included offense of manslaughter by act, which improperly imposed the additional element of intent to kill. Montgomery v. State, — So.3d -, 34 Fla. L. Weekly D360, 2009 WL 350624 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 12, 2009) (question certified; *921conflict certified). Therefore, this case is reversed and remanded for a new trial.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BARFIELD, DAVIS, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Riesel v. State, 48 So. 3d 885 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…use the “instruction erroneously imposed upon the jury a requirement to find that Montgomery intended to kill” the victim).2 See also Hardee v. State, — So. 3d —, 2009 WL 3047359, 34 Fla. L. Weekly D1946 (Fla. 1st DCA Sept. 25, 2009); Ward v. State, 12 So. 3d 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Stinson v. State, — So. 3d —, —, 2009 WL 633133, 34 Fla. L. Weekly D570, D571 (Fla. 1st DCA Mar. 13, 2009). See generally Reddick v. State, 394 So. 2d 417, 418 (Fla.1981) (“The failure to instruct on the next immediate lesser in…
-
Rushing v. State, 133 So. 3d 943 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…a number of convictions where the erroneous jury instruction on the lesser included offense of manslaughter was given. See, e.g., Stinson v. State, 69 So. 3d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Hardee v. State, 69 So. 3d 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Ward v. State, 12 So. 3d 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). We have also held that the standard jury instruction for the lesser included offense of attempted manslaughter by act suffers from the same infirmities as the instruction in Montgomery. See Lamb v. State, 18 So. 3d 734 (Fla. 1st…
-
Rivera v. State, 29 So. 3d 1139 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…Thomas v. State, 22 So. 3d 626 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Gough v. State, — So. 3d -, 2009 WL 3164113 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Hardee v. State, - So. 3d -, 2009 WL 3047359 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); White v. State, 16 So. 3d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Ward v. State, 12 So. 3d 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Bass v. State, 11 So. 3d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Stinson v. State, — So. 3d -, 2009 WL 633133 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). In sum, because Appellant failed to demonstrate any prejudice resulting from the use of the standard jury inst…
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
- Butler v. State, 493 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1986)
- Hernandez v. State, 938 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)